Question: Out of the four sources for Christian theology - Scripture, the Christian tradition, reason (and philosophy), and contemporary human experience (including the sciences), which two are most important for you and you do theology, and why?
This is the first question I must answer in my CLP training. Of course, there are readings to read, and lots of thoughts and studies to contemplate before I write my two page double spaced essay, but I was wondering how to answer this question just off the bat. I figure that before I can have my mind changed and my perspective broadened, I need to figure out where I stand in the debate to begin with. And I thought I'd share that with my fellow travelers because I value your opinions and vastly different experiences to help me shape my thinking on the subject. You may not make me see eye to eye with you, but you can at least illuminate corners of the argument that I might miss in the shadows of my ignorance. We'll call this exercise Cloud Contemplation... a modern study method utilizing the latest in social technology.
Hmm... Well, obviously Scripture is very important. Its probably not the only method of knowing God's will, but it's certainly one of the most definitive. The challenge with Scripture is not in its definitiveness, but in its definition. How it is defined seems to be determined mostly by cultural and temporal preferences. The same written passage can probably be interpreted several different ways. It seems that for such an inefficient form of communication to be considered the ONE and ONLY definitive truth of God is asking for theological stagnation and misinterpretation. But then again, perhaps God made the word flesh to transform such an inefficient form of communication into a perfect one. If the written text serves as nothing more than a way to identify Jesus as the one true authority on all things, then it has done its job.
The Christian Tradition is a curious thing in and of itself. I'm not quite sure how to define it. Are we talking about the things we have always done as having some weight over the things we have yet to do? I've found that looking backwards while moving forwards is the one guaranteed way to stumble. On the other hand, while going from Point A to Point Z, it's probably a good idea to remember Point A - if for no other reason than to judge how far you've come. Or are we talking about those things that define us as a religion - church structure and baptism and prayer and the like? To be honest, I haven't really given those much thought. It's sort of like asking a newcomer to the sport of baseball what he feels about the Infield Fly rule. A) It's such a loaded question. And B) Its such an integral part of the game that contemplation of it is way too complicated at this point. I can't weigh how I feel about baptism because I can't separate it out from everything else at this point. Baptism is baptism. Its part of theology to me.
Reason (and philosophy) - I really don't know anybody that goes against their own reason or philosophy when it comes to anything in life. 2 plus 2 is four... but I'll call it five because that's what my Pastor says. Yeah... that just doesn't work. But if you're asking about whether a specific reason or a specific philosophy has any bearing on my theology... that's a good question. I'd say as a starting point that if scripture is cherry-picked for theology that conforms to your own personal world view, then philosophy and reason are torn apart with jackhammers - gleaned cleaner than a grape vine on the day of Jubilee. Reason and Philosophy surely have to be accepted or rejected according to our own personal tastes and then probably modified to fit specific needs as life goes on. As a tool of theology, I think one would have to be careful about using "reason" or philosophy because of its varying nature as life goes on and new views about once strongly held beliefs come to the forefront. This is the one area where hypocrisy is probably most prevalent.
The last is deceptively probably the first - human experience and the sciences - probably informs more theology than anything else. Our lives always form the framework through which we see the entire world and try to make sense of it. Each new wrinkle in our human experience informs our own theology and then, in turn, can be used to do theology with others. Whether we are very good at turning human experience into theology or not, our natural human instinct is to relate life to our theology and our theology to life.
I think I'll leave that off there. Please weigh in while I still have time to chew the gristle of thought-provoking marrow.
1 comment:
You mention that scripture is a good way to understand God's will. I'm not sure "God's will" is what the question is about. That's a part of it, but not the whole thing. I think of theology as a paradigm you use to ask and answer the big questions - including the one about God's will.
If I had to chose between those 4 options for what informs my theology, I'd vote for scripture and human experience. That doesn't slight the importance of Christian tradition and reason, but the exercise is to make a choice.
Post a Comment