Emerging Scholars Blog

InterVarsity's Emerging Scholars Network

Christian voice

Incarnational Presence: The Translation Principle

Photo by Christina Morillo from Pexels

We are grateful to Julian Reese for sharing this series of articles on incarnational presence, particularly in the context of our academic departments. This is Part four of the series. To read previous articles, here are links for: Part One, Part Two, and Part Three.

_____________________________

Last week, as we reflected on earning an incarnational voice, we articulated a posture toward the academic conversation.

We envisioned entering the thought world of an academic community as a learner, humbly asking questions, coming in weakness, humility, and with deep curiosity. Our curiosity shows we care.

In this post we want to consider what makes a voice incarnational. What is distinctive about a voice that brings a faith-informed perspective to the academic conversation constructively?

What are some of the qualities that make an ordinary, perhaps unremarkable voice, an incarnational voice?

AN INCARNATIONAL VOICE TRANSLATES

The very nature of the Incarnation is translation. Jesus is the eikon  (image) of the invisible God. He takes the fullness of grace and truth and makes it intelligible, through his body, to those who were unable otherwise to see God clearly.

The incarnational voice is one that translates an invisible reality into the language of its audience to make itself understood.

In preparation for a joint venture where our Fellowship cosponsored Christian philosopher Eleonore Stump in a dialogue on suffering, the Philosophy Department hosted a reading group where they read and discussed Dr. Stump’s WANDERING IN DARKNESS. Graduate students and faculty gathered to engage with her ideas and her unfamiliar faith-informed perspective before the dialogue. A few of the students were people of faith.

One of the faculty expressed frustration repeatedly with some of her distinctively Christian terms like “sanctification”. One of the Christian graduate students patiently and articulately explained the biblical idea in language that a philosopher could understand, while respecting his decision to continue in his unbelief.

The believing graduate student was translating. He was displaying the Translation Principle of incarnational voice, communicating with people who may not believe in supernatural reality in language that was intelligible to them.

Dr. Stump’s conversation partner for that event, an atheist and a Marxist, later wrote:

“I think you could make some mileage out of the notion of a need for translation. . . .  to be accessible to non-believing academics, you’ll need to translate the Gospel into our language.  And that’s a problem and a big task:  How do you express/embody the Gospel to a group of folks who might not believe in any supernatural reality at all?  Granted, it may be that every translation is a partial distortion, every translation captures only some of the original.  Still, how close can y’all come to translating the Gospel into my (Marxist?) language?. . . You’re trying to enter into my world (and invite me into yours, of course), not vice versa.“

An incarnational voice has something positive, productive to contribute to this conversation as we translate faith-informed thinking, making it intelligible in the academic world. If we remain silent, the academic project is impoverished.

AN INCARNATIONAL VOICE ENGAGES

An incarnational voice acknowledges the liminality between the conversation in the Church and the conversation in the life of the Academy, and seeks to bridge the divide between the two. The incarnational voice is one that offers positive, creative possibilities to the present conversation. As the Son of God was incarnate between two worlds, the invisible and the visible, the incarnational voice gives expression between the religious community and the University world, inviting people to consider a new way of seeing life.

The Greek word for repent, metanoeo, means “to change your thought paradigm.” It is an invitation to consider a new plausibility structure, a new way of looking at reality and the world. It is a dynamic, leavening influence, which is why the Apostle Paul could say that in all the world, the Gospel “is constantly bearing fruit and increasing” (Colossians 1: 6). Or why Jesus can compare his Gospel to yeast which leavens a lump of dough (Matthew 13:33).

The experiences that the early Christians had with Jesus of Nazareth caused them to reconsider how they lived and thought and imagined reality in the culture in which they found themselves. When they engaged their culture with these new perspectives on what was true, something dynamic and creative was the result.

An incarnational voice offers an alternative way of thinking to what is found in the present conversation. It offers another way of imagining reality to what their culture is presenting as “the way things are.” When Christian thinking engages with a new community, it is possible that something entirely new will emerge.

A critical race theorist tells her classes that “white Christianity is the scourge of the earth.” An incarnational voice probes deeper to understand that statement, and appreciates the concerns for justice that are found there. But an Incarnational Voice then engages in dialogue, bringing to the conversation perspectives emerging from the Gospel of Jesus.

An historian claims that “anti-semitism is intrinsic to the Christian faith.” An  incarnational voice offers a public forum and civil dialogue to consider the merits and validity of such a claim, then continues in relationship maintaining ongoing dialogue with that scholar about the perspective of the Gospel over history,  human experience, and personal life choices.

An incarnational voice doesn’t seek shut down conversations. An incarnational voice seeks to enter the conversation and participate from a gospel-informed perspective, bringing a faith-informed perspective into a place where it would not otherwise exist.

An incarnational voice exists to engage.

AN INCARNATIONAL VOICE ENRICHES

An incarnational voice is one that seeks the common good as it enhances the flourishing of the community.

The incarnational ministry of Jesus is characterized by words that announce Good News, and works that make that good news a visible reality. Jesus announces the presence of the Kingdom of God, but he also heals a mother’s sick child, or restores the sight of a blind man. He touches the untouchable and treats the outcast with dignity and respect.

An incarnational voice is one that seeks the flourishing of the community of which it is a part and makes the Good News a visible reality.

The fruit of an incarnational voice is reflected in Dr. D telling the Christian campus ministers “I am mostly healed from my PTSD of growing up in a toxic spiritual community.”

Or when Court began a correspondence with visiting speaker Nicholas Wolterstorff about his dissertation, later resulting in a published a book and an academic conference on Forgiveness.

Or when we observe that most of the departmental conversation partners have put events with our guest Christian scholars on their CV’s as they consider it an enhancement to their reputation in their professional life.

One academic wrote about incarnational presence:

“The respectful dialogue or conversation is, so far as I can understand it, part of an incarnational presence.  You’re here to help us have better conversations or to have conversations about related, but slightly better topics.  We will not reject good talk.  We feel renewed by honest, probing conversation, by genuine inquiry.  We’re academics; we live for that.” 

The Apostle Paul says that the gospel is that God is going to bless all the nations of the earth in his promise to Abraham. The incarnation of the son of God in Jesus, is the fulfillment of that promise. God blesses the world in Christ, as he heals, restores, and defeats the negative powers in the world and all their manifestations. We see this in the stories of Jesus as he heals, forgives, delivers from oppressive powers and, finally, subdues and triumphs over the forces of evil by his contest and death on the Cross.

The Poets and prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures repeatedly indicated the “nations would be glad” when God came to rescue his people. “The trees of the field will clap their hands and the mountains and hills will break further into shouts of joy.”

When an incarnational voice makes its presence known, there is enrichment and flourishing.  And the departments of the university will be glad for its presence in their midst. And the trees of the field clap for joy.

Incarnational Presence: Earning an Incarnational Voice

2018 Conference ConversationThis is the third in a series on incarnational presence in our academic departments. In the first, InterVarsity staff minister Julian Reese introduced and defined the idea of incarnational presence. The second post explores how we establish that presence, applying the incarnational principle. This week, Reese discusses how that presence led to opportunities to use his voice.

______________________________

In our last post, we considered what kind of presence we wished to have on a University campus. In this post and the next, we will think about earning an incarnational voice in the academic conversation. This week, we consider how to earn a voice in the academic culture. Next week, we will consider what makes that voice incarnational.

Curiosity shows we care.

If we want others to listen to us, we must listen to others. Love what they love. Care about the things that concern them. The way to the heart of a faculty member is to ask about their research, and to be honestly curious. An example of academic love language is “I read this and thought of you.”

I think that I first heard of the Friday afternoon philosophy department gatherings from Andrew, one of the Ph.D. Students I had met in the philosophy department. They called this meeting a klatch, and usually it was a time for different students or faculty to present a “work-in-progress,” a paper they were preparing for presentation or publication.

When I learned that the whole department was usually present, I asked Andrew if could attend. I entered quietly and sat in the back. The small classroom was almost full, and I recognized most of the faculty from the departmental website and a few of the graduate students.

The lectures started out simply enough, but I soon was lost, even though I was taking notes. These philosophers were not using words the way I used words. And their concepts and illustration were alien to me, impossible to understand.

But I kept coming back each week. Taking notes. Writing in my margins the words that I did not understand. And after each lecture asking Andrew questions about the meaning.

I began to learn names. Discover interests. Build relationships. Overcome my fears.

They wondered who I was, and why I was there. But they allowed me to come into this part of their world. And they appreciated my curiosity about their interests and expertise.

Several years later, the Head of the department was asked why he didn’t throw me out of his office when I first met him and asked him to partner in an event we wanted to sponsor. “I decided that I could trust this guy. He not only showed up at our lectures, he took notes! I decided that he was taking a genuine interest in our work as philosophers. And I was willing to take a chance on him.”

“He took notes.”

Curiosity shows we care. We earn a voice when we love the conversation.

Learn the language.

Our next habit as we earn a voice, is to learn the language.

Early in my ministry at the University of Tennessee, my imagination was captivated by the quotation on a poster for NEXUS, an academic conference sponsored by the English Department.

“With the death of Jacques Derrida at the end of 2004, theorists and literary critics alike asked themselves if they were witnessing the death of theory, and if not, what theoretical trend might develop to usher theory into the twenty-first century. Recently Stanley Fish wrote, ‘When Jacques Derrida died I was called by a reporter who wanted to know what would succeed high theory and the triumvirate of race, gender, and class as the center of intellectual energy in the academy. I answered like a shot: religion.”

“Really?!,” I thought to myself, “Religion as the center of intellectual energy in the academy!”

So, I blocked off the time on my calendar, paid my registration fee, and made my way to the first seminar, thinking I might have something to contribute to this.

I was in for quite a shock. Just like in those Friday afternoon philosophy klatches, the speakers all were speaking in my native English, but the vocabulary and even syntax were unlike anything with which I was familiar. They were not using words like I used words.

I was literally afraid to open my mouth, because I felt that anything I had to say would be completely unintelligible to those around me, and that I would look foolish and ignorant.

I needed to learn their language.

This was not my world. These were not my people. I knew very little about Stanley Fish or Jacques Derrida, and had never heard of John Caputo, the well-known keynote speaker.

But this WAS the world of graduate students and faculty among whom I wanted to have a ministry. They were conversant with the ideas of Derrida. They were thrilled to have opportunity to hear John Caputo. And this was a world where I wanted the Christian Voice to have a seat at the intellectual table, from which it had been excluded and marginalized for so long.

In THE SOUL OF THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY REVISITED (2021), the revision of his 1994 classic, George Marsden writes “American higher education has changed in some striking ways since the publication of The Soul of the American University more than a quarter century ago.” Marsden titles his epilogue “An Unexpected Sequel: A Renaissance of Christian Academia” (p. 365 ff), writing “in recent decades traditional Protestants have developed a substantial community of accomplished scholars who can hold their own in mainstream academic settings and also provide alternatives to forms of anti-intellectualism that continue to persist in many of their own communities.”

Faith-informed thinking is earning a voice. Christians are learning the language. There is a new opportunity in the university culture across North America. If we learn the language, Christian thinking finds welcome to participate in this “new center of intellectual energy” with creative perspectives and something significant to contribute to the conversation.

Participate in the Conversation.

Several weeks after meeting Dr. D on the floor of the Religious Studies department , she invited me to a departmental Hebrew reading group. I looked at her in astonishment, “Dr. D, I haven’t looked at Hebrew in almost 30 years. How could I participate in a Hebrew reading group with a room full of scholars?” “Come on” she said. “All of the group are not scholars; people are at all different levels. You can just listen. And it will be fun.”

Immediately, it dawned on me that she had just invited me into a weekly meeting with some of the academics of her department. And a Bible study of the Hebrew Scriptures, no less.

I had to say yes.

Certainly it would be worth a little embarrassment and humiliation to build relationships with this group of people I wanted to reach with the Gospel. What an opportunity to follow Jesus with an Incarnational      Presence in the Religious Studies Department.

So I began to show up on Friday mornings to the conference room in the Religious Studies Department. The group was led by one of the feisty Jewish Hebrew lecturers, who delighted in teasing an evangelical Christian and his “seminary Hebrew.“ There were several faculty and Ph. D. Students along with a few undergrads from the beginning Biblical Hebrew classes. A member of the local synagogue participated as well.

I took Dr. D at her word, and just came and listened while I scrambled to remember the basics of my 30-year-old Hebrew classes. After a few weeks, the leader of the group, Dr. L, began asking me to join in. First, to read, then to talk about the texts from my evangelical Christian perspective. I was hesitant, at first, until I thought about having one of my own Bible studies with a new person in it. It dawned on me that I would want this person to speak up and contribute to the group. A person who just sits there and never says anything can actually be an impediment to a healthy group.

So, I left behind the role of visitor became a member. I gave up the identity of tourist and became a resident. What was initially “your group” became “our” group. I began to speak up and participate. And the group welcomed my contribution.

They will welcome yours, as well.

Engaging the whole university for Christ

Terence C. Halliday on Engaging the whole university for Christ.

Are we going to treat the campus as a whole as our mission field?
What if Christ really, truly engaged the whole university? This is a great, bold and magnificent vision. May we be worthy of it. — Terence C. Halliday

To continue the train of thought inspired by NY Times: Colleges and Evangelicals Collide on Bias Policy and Book Review: The Global Diffusion of Evangelicalism, let’s “get back to basics” and give attention to Terence C. Halliday‘s Engaging the whole university for Christ. As you may know, Terence is a specialist in globalization and law. The below presentation was given at a regional International Fellowship of Evangelical Students (IFES) conference in Ghana and I find it inspirational with regard to our labors as part of not only InterVarsity-USA, but also the larger IFES movement.

Engaging the whole university for Christ from IFES World. [Read more…] about Engaging the whole university for Christ

Engaging the University

Ready to get serious about Engaging the University? Then let’s return to Vinoth Ramachandra, who serves on the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students (IFES) Senior Leadership Team as Secretary for Dialogue & Social Engagement.

Engaging the University: Vinoth Ramachandra from IFES World.

What does Engaging the University look like on your campus? How can dialogical ministry be more fully developed on your campus? How can the Emerging Scholars Network assist you in incarnational ministry? Please let me know of particular online resources which can be of assistance (encouragement, equipping, academic mentoring/networking, discerning the Presence of Christ).

Note: You may remember that in Fall 2013 we gave significant attention to Ramachandra’s .

A Dialogical Campus Ministry

Dr Vinoth Ramachandra serves on the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students (IFES) Senior Leadership Team as Secretary for Dialogue & Social Engagement.

“I’m still waiting to read a scientific paper that gives a biological explanation of the emergence of biological science among us human beings, also a naturalist account of what motivates people to become evolutionary psychologists and why others are impressed by their explanations.” — A taste of the pointed wit which draws one into Part 3 of  Vinoth Ramachandra‘s Engaging the University (22:04). As you my remember from Part 2, the recording cut off as he began a “defense of the human.” Ramachandra focuses on resisting the biological reductionism which combines neurological imaging of the human brain with “the popular pseudoscience of evolutionary psychology.”

Biological reductionism requires much more consideration than that given to it by Ramachandra. What better way than a dialogic university ministry, i.e., “a ministry which takes the university seriously on its own terms”? But can we as members of the campus community truly take up Ramachandra’s challenge to embrace university ministry as “a distinctive calling, not simply an extension or parallel of church based ministries”? Can we support a ministry which “listens as well as speaks . . . seeks to stimulate respectful conversations both within and across academic disciplines, and with Christians and non-Christians alike”? [Read more…] about A Dialogical Campus Ministry