If this catches your attention then you might also be interested in some posts I did a few months ago on this book.

Coincidentally, I’ve been preparing a talk which touches on Christians and work. In the process I found a piece by Miroslav Volf: God and Work.

I’ll also mention again another article that I’ve linked to before: Work as sacrament by Curtis Chang.

First, the start of the book looks at the implicit ‘heirarchy of callings’ in the church — based on whose work is assumed to have eternal value. The underlying assumption is that such a heirarchy is wrong. I don’t want to disagree with that, but perhaps the assumption could have been explored more. After all, maybe it is the case that some vocations have a greater eternal value & we just have to live with that. Or perhaps we have to accept that the eternal value of my work is indirect, in that I support those who have a more obvious impact. Not a big issue, but one that perhaps should have been given some space.

Second is a slight lack of satisfaction with the exegesis in the book. Obviously the problem Cosden has is that no New Testament writers are aiming to deal with this issue in particular, so you don’t have nice explicit passages. I felt like the book got a little unclear in finding a way through — in trying to take a normal systematic approach it’s possible to get lost in the detailed discussion.

An interesting contrast is an article by Douglas Moo on ‘New Testament Eschatology and the Environment‘. This covers a not unrelated issue (is there continuity between nature now and the new creation) and has a similar problem. However, it seems to me that Moo takes a more helpful approach. He starts head-on, with the observation that there is no clear statement on the issue, but aims to survey the underlying theology.

I think Cosden is trying for more — building a clear case for the inclusion of our work in new creation — but ends up with a less robust result.

Not that the discussions aren’t helpful — for instance the parts on Romans 8 and Revelation 21/22 are great. But it was not completely satisfying.

Maybe I was hoping for more than is possible! Or need to sit and think about it more…

First, it is great that this book works to add a eschatological component to our discussions of how Christian belief applies to all of life.

For a number of years, the application of our beliefs to all of life has been a big theme for me. That is, developing a comprehensive Christian worldview. But, there is a slight niggle — a sort of missing link. After reading this, I think part of the niggle has been the feeling that not every thing quite joins up. We have, on one side, the push for all of our thinking to be based on our beliefs about the world and for what we believe to influence all we do. But, on the other, the necessity does not always feel as strong as it ‘should’.

I think a lot of this comes down to eschatology — I can try to apply what I believe to my studies/work/etc., but if all of the things I study/make/etc are headed for the dustbin, then where is the real motivation? Why not expend the mental energy in something more worthwhile?

Cosden’s arguments make an important step in the right direction. (I’m not implying that he has doen somthing other haven’t here, but perhaps he spells it out in a particularly clear way.) If we have the view that things we do at work/study/etc have the potential for ‘heavenly good’ then the dots start to link up better. Now we have a clear motivation for applying what we believe across the board — where the things we do don’t match up with God’s future they become valueless, but where they do… So, if I want them to have significance, I really need to work on how my beliefs impact my day-to-day activities and developing an all-emcompassing worldview.

This can be implied in any church when

… our practice of church, our spiritual heroes, and our beliefs about spiritual/eternal things have spoken louder than our words and have undermined what we intended… our words ring hollow when we only regularly and publicly pray for those missionaries on ‘faith support’. And it is hard to believe we really are full-time ‘salt and light’ when only visiting missionaries are asked to come up front in church and visit small groups to talk about the ups and downs of their ministries.

Obviously, a theology based on the ‘heavenly good’ of everyday work takes us to a more inclusive perspective. If all our work can be part of God’s new creation and involves us partnering with God, then we have the potential to be part of God’s mission in every area of our lives.

…when done in a way that images God and co-operates with him, human work in itself images God and thus co-operates with him, human work in itself is Christian missionary activity. Why? Because it is largely (though not exclusively) through our work that we reflect God’s image and co-operate with him in bringing people and the whole of creation to humanity’s and nature’s ultimate maturity and future.

This is, of course, incredibly liberating. Suddenly, I can become part of God’s mission in everything. Not just when preaching, but also when I carry out my everyday work in ways that line up with God’s kingdom.

Of course, we need to find a way to counteract the negative message that has been sent out. How do we do this?

Mostly we need to proactive. Slow and steady will win the race. When we are together in our various Christian gatherings and meetings, small or large, formal or informal, we have to be intentional about devising ways to help us see each person in their daily work as a missionary … [we] need to consciously practice naming ourselves and our work as missionary.

Finally Cosden looks at the way this interacts with evangelism. If we are all made in the image of God and our work is important, then all of us, non-believers and believers, are to larger or smaller extent working with God’s mission:

All people were created to image God, and thus all people by virtue of their humanity are included in God’s purposes for creation. Not all people image God in fellowship with him, but we do nevertheless corporately carry out his mission to work in one way or another.
Importantly, our new mission enterprise based on the heavenly good of earthly work treats people differently from our old approach to mission. God still includes in his purposes those who haven’t yet, haven’t fully, or even won’t ever, come to faith.
Previously, it was simple to catagorize people sharply as either ‘them’ or ‘us’. In this way of thinking, the tendency was always to dehumanize others by treating ‘them’ ultimately as projects.

This is a really fascinating line of thought. I’m particularly interested in the consequence of not treating others as projects. It something that I’ve noticed for a long time: sometimes we seem to be more worried about ‘contacts’ than friends. As Cosden implies, unless we are careful this is a frequent tendency.

Finally Cosden links this into the ‘belonging-before-believing’ debate:

…this new understanding of mission is actually not all that new. In fact, it dovetails nicely with what many of us have been discovering for a long time about mission. That is, people need to be included. They need to belong before they can believe.

In many ways, this final chapter shows the motivation that Cosden has had all along — the expansion to a fuller understanding of mission. And, as I said, it is a great vision that makes a lot of sense and enlarges our view of God’s new creation to one that really encompasses the whole world.

Hopefully, I will find time to write some other reactions to the book n the near future…

He starts by looking at the problems surrounding work and our perspectives. An particularly interesting quote is…

A bad theology of work(s), therefore leads to a failure to enter genuinely into our salvation/justification. There are complex reasons for this, but part of it is that our work(s) are part of who we are, and they cannot help but seek some kind of spiritual home. If we don’t find an appropriate spiritual category for our work, then it takes over our lives and becomes alien to us. It begins to dominate us as we become dis-integrated people.
As we have seen, our work finds its spiritual justification, its alternate home and value, through out justification. Our work is an outworking and expression of who we are. Thus, our justification becomes our work’s justification too. through our freedom in Christ, our work(s) becomes set free so that it has a genuine earthly usefulness now, but also a continued existence, like we do, in heaven.

That triggers all sorts of thoughts and discussions. Not least the thought that in (rightly) guarding against work for our justification, we can throw away too much and find a part of our life that never really gets fitted into God’s plan. Cosden’s argument is that, if we dont’ consciously fit it in to our spirituality, then it takes a distorted place and causes problems. For instance, we subconsciously try to use working hard as a way to pay God back. On the other hand

The fact that God in ‘making all things new’ chooses to incorporate our work(s) moitivates us but does not crush us. It fills our work with meaning and purpose — but not more than we as humans can bear.

In addition, with this perspective we start to have a basis for making real judgments about our work — how does what I do fit in with ‘new creation’?

There are extracts available on the publisher’s site.

The is a LICC review & related article in the July ‘Workwise’.

Curtis Chang has written an article which touches on the same sort of issues/ideas.

Looking at New Creation, Cosden’s basic thesis is this: that the work we do — of any type — can have eternal consequences. So, when God re-creates creation, our work is not wiped out, but is redeemed and transformed along with everything else. Not that it remains as-is, but somehow it forms a part of the resurrected world. [For some reason, I imagine this (very very roughly) in terms of architecture -- aspects of designs that fit with God's justice, love, enhance creation, etc. find a place; things that are oppressive and disruptive don't.]

Cosden bases this on Jesus’ resurrection, plus 1 Cor 15, Col 1, Rom 8 and Rev 21-22. This section is going to take me a while to think through properly, but let’s go for a first shot. For me the interesting starting points are Jesus’ resurrection and the Revelation passages. Jesus’ resurrection is typically taken as a preview of our resurrection & new creation. So, an interesting observation is that the wounds from the cross are still evident. As Cosden points out, it seems that “… the results of this particular ‘human work’ are guaranteed to carry over into God’s as well as our own future and eternal reality.” Of course, there is the possibility that he is looking at a special case, but it is thought provoking.

At the other end of the discussion is the Revelation image of the new heavens and the new earth. The key here is that the new creation includes ‘the glory and splendor of the nations’. “It will be forever open to include the best of human culture (achievements past and possibly ongoing). And although this is not in any way limited to our work, it will thus include what we have accomplished through work.” For me this is the facinating observation. It seems to be the clearest expression of the idea that new creation includes, in some way, what has gone on in the old creation. This opens up all sorts of thoughts and possibilities (and discussions…)

These are the top and tail of Cosden’s discussion, In between he looks at the discussions of new creation and resurrection in Paul. Although these are very helpful, they don’t quite get all the way for me, on first reading at least. The basic approach is ‘New Creation is transformed creation; work and its products are an integral part of creation, so they get included and transformed.’ The discussion is great on the first step, but then relies on assertions such as “That this salvation of the natural world incudes our work follows logically. Work, which has further shaped nature, is now just as much a part of nature as what God made originally.” I can see this is a reasonable move to make, but I think it would have helped to have discussed and argued the point in more detail. It is, after all, a key step in the argument. (I may come back to this in a later post.)

The other half of this section is looking at Genesis. In this Cosden looks at the idea that mankind’s orginal purpose was to be an apprentice of God. That we were to work with Him in stewarding and developing creation. In this way we image God. This seems to me to be far less contraversial, but is equally important to join the dots between our original purpose and the long term effects that we have.

From these two aspects, Cosden lays the ground work for a theology of work, which leads onto his discussion of a spirituality of work and a rethinking of mission in the final part…

In the first part of the book Cosden looks at the problems we have with ‘secular’ employment. In a very good analysis he talks about the frustration that Christians in everyday work feel and the reasons for this.

His argument is that we have a conflict. On one side we affirm that all are called by God and that every calling is equal — it sis simply that some are called to ‘secular’ jobs and some to ‘full-time Christian ministry’.

People typically think that God frees up a few believers to focus their energies on the ministry more directly than others who have a different, more general calling.

All fine… until we bring in our beliefs about eternity. We believe that things of heaven and eternity are ultimate. So, things related to these are of ultimate importance. But, what do we consider will last into eternity? Most likely, not the products of everyday work. It’s the explicitly Christian activities that we believe count long-term.

But if we follow this path we begin to see an implicit hierarchy in roles and potential for the majority of Christians to feel second-class. After all, why has God called me to a job that has minimal eternal impact, when there are other possibilities? Cosden develops this with an entertaining description of the hierarchy of jobs and a look at why we approach things this way.

The analysis seems pretty accurate to me, both in looking at my own feelings and in noticing the way people around me talk. Obviously we have a problem…

In my last post I talked about mis-matches in our theology when you start from the beginning or the end. It seems to me that this is what is happening here (obviously the book influenced the previous post!) — ‘we are have equal callings’ comes up against our eschatology and doesn’t quite fit. You have to wonder if there is a hole in our theology somewhere…