“To be Christian at all is to be a theologian. There are no exceptions,” say Howard Stone and James Duke in the
introduction to their fantastic little primer on How to Think Theologically. From the very beginning, the authors distinguish themselves from other theological writers by placing all Christian thinkers—from Karl Barth and Wolfhart Pannenberg to my grandpa Roger—in the same boat. The purpose of this book, write Stone and Duke, is not to dryly dictate a complex and incoherent systematic theology, but
to focus instead on the everyday act of doing theology in our personal settings, a process they will refer to as a “trenches hermeneutic” in the final chapter. Doing theology,
they say, requires sincere theological reflection and a faith that seeks understanding. Over the next few days I will be posting my thoughts and reactions to each chapter of this excellent book. I highly recommend it for anyone who is suspicious of theology or thinks that they are not cut out for “doing theology.”
Chapter 1: Faith, Understanding, and Reflection
The
authors begin their daunting task of teaching their readers how to think
theologically by recognizing a few basic premises: all of our theological
thinking is somewhat defined by the parameters of our upbringing, social
context, and biblical/theological preconceptions—what Stone and Duke refer to
as “embedded theology”. However, while our embedded theologies may give our
faith and beliefs a general shape, we should not be confined to them. Instead, we should continually challenge
and question our preconceived theologies to instead produce a theology that is
deliberative in nature—an “understanding of faith that emerges from a process
of carefully reflecting upon embedded theological convictions” (p.16). A
deliberative theology carefully weighs all sides of a given issue that demands
theological reflection. It requires setting aside biases in favor of
theological conscientiousness.
The
obvious real-world example of embedded theology is readily visible as religious
fundamentalism. The fundamentalist who clings to an embedded theology of a
literal six-day creation bristles at the notion of divinely inspired biological
evolution, claiming, “If part of the Bible is wrong, then it’s all wrong!” But in my own experience I have come to find
that embedded theology is everywhere, regardless of whether one is a
hyper-conservative fundamentalist or a super-liberal relativist. My own gut
reaction in the past has been to disregard those issues that prove to be
classic challenges to theological liberalism—Did the resurrection really
happen? Is there a literal Hell, and do “non-believers” really go there? Can
and do miracles actually occur?—by claiming that Christian theology is really
just all about love and forgiveness, and all those other nice things. But at a
certain point in my seminary career I began to have those biases challenged. If
we cling to such warm-and-fuzzy notions as the “real” Christian theology, what
is to separate us as Christians from, say, a friendly atheist who holds the
same values? I am now beginning to deliberate my theological views on such
questions, but have yet to find a solid answer.
Chapter 2: Fashioning Theology
In
this chapter, Stone and Duke explain how a Christian might get to work
constructing (fashioning) a deliberative theology. Every theologian, they
argue, performs the three tasks of “interpreting the Christian faith,
correlating those interpretations with other interpretations, and assessing the
adequacy of the interpretations and their correlations” (p.27). In other words,
for any given issue requiring theological reflection, the Christian who hopes
to exercise a deliberative theology must ask themselves what they believe, how
that belief is reconciled to other perspectives of belief
(even—especially—within one’s own theological worldview), and whether or not
that belief is sufficient to answer the theological issue at hand. We do this
by considering the interpretation’s appropriateness or faithfulness to the
Christian message, its intelligibility (i.e. it has to make sense to other
Christians), its moral integrity or ethicality, and its reasonable validity.
No comments:
Post a Comment