Exploring Ecumenism: Theology

Theology

Tuesday, 15 November 2011

Analytical Theology: Three Elements of Religion

To make a start at evaluating the contribution of analytical theology to ecumenism, I will introduce a model of religion. This is taken from Gerard W Hughes God of Surprises, chapter 2, although what follows is mostly my interpretation of his model.

Hughes identifies three stages of human development: childhood, adolescence and adulthood. Each of these stages is associated with one of three elements of religion, namely institutional, critical and mystical in that order.

So, this is a model of faith development. I will examine each of the three elements in detail in future posts. First, I want to examine the relationship between the three elements. They are a progression in the sense that an adult who remains at the institutional stage lacks something. But on the other hand, the later stages contain the previous stages. So, the critical stage is dependent upon and grows out of the institutional, and similarly the mystical grows out of the critical.

This sort of progression is often found in religious experience, so for example in the Church of England, someone on the way to ordination must be a deacon before they are ordained a priest. They do not as a priest cease to be a deacon. In Methodism, similarly there is a progression from local preacher to minister and the minister is still a local preacher. Of course, the Church of England has a third stage, bishop. The bishop is still a priest and a deacon.

So, is it true that someone who is at the adult mystical stage, still holds elements of the institutional and critical? Or to turn the question around, can you become a mystic without experience of the institutional church? I've no idea. Even if I had I'm sure it would take more than one post to explain it.

What I will do to complete this post is to broadly outline the relationship between the three. I think it is simply of the logical pattern of thesis, antithesis, synthesis. The institutional is faith as it is taught to children in the churches. The critical is the negation of that faith in adolescence. The mystical integrates the first two into a third stance, quite different from the other two.

The tragedy is some people get so far and stop. This is perhaps the fault of the institutional church, to some degree but also we all must take some responsibility for the state of our own faith. Sometimes it is too convenient to blame the churches for our own failings.

Posted at 09:41 PM in Religion, Theology | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, 14 November 2011

Analytical Theology: A Mixed Blessing?

Ivory Tower Pendant. Image by SelenaAnne via Flickr

This is the first in a series of posts exploring the role of analytical theology in ecumenism. It seems to me there is a problem and I aim to work out its exact nature as I write.

I remember, many years ago in 1981, I started the study year at the Urban Theology Unit. We were warned of the dangers of the type of theology studied by theologians in ivory towers. Urban theology is the theology done on the streets. Anyone can do it and indeed everyone has a theology.

Urban theology is not as chaotic as this might sound. Whilst everyone undoubtedly has a theology (irrespective of whether they know what it is), it does not follow they actively do theology. Doing theology requires discipline, possibly the most important of which is accountability. As we express our theology to others, as we share our stories, those stories and insights are validated through the Christian community. Academic theology sets certain standards but its purpose is best seen in the uses made of it by Christians engaged in living their lives on the streets, or wherever they are.

Central to urban theology (or more generally 'contextual theology') practice is the 'pastoral cycle'. I remember attending a conference, during the early nineties, where I found myself in a workshop with a group of male academics. The other members of the group were all women and the meeting was dominated by the academics. Indeed I was the only non-academic to speak. The theme had been introduced by James Fowler and we had been invited to discuss the pastoral cycle. It seems the academics were setting exam questions about the pastoral cycle! After about two thirds of the time I interrupted and suggested there is a problem. How, I asked, do you select the biblical passage to compare with your experience? I was shouted down for questioning the wisdom of James Fowler. In the dinner queue the women told me they understood my question but found the academics impossible to relate to (they had their backs to us!).

I wish I could say this behaviour is atypical of academic theologians but in my experience it is impossible to break into their world except by the route of study in academic theology, through first degrees and further degrees.

Before I finish this post, I want to make a point in recognition of the contribution analytical theology, a branch of academic theology, has made to ecumenism. I intend to be critical of this approach to theology and the way it dominates the ecumenical scene (in future posts in this sequence). However, I have written before of academic theologians' successes in ecumenism. They have contributed a great deal. Possibly, the best example of their contribution is to the recognition by mainstream churches of one another's validity as Christian traditions. Not so long ago, churches were prepared to go to war for their beliefs.

(I have added a couple of papers at the end of this post, making the case for academic theology. Not all academic theology is analytical. (I will define analytical theology later.) I have sat at the feet of some excellent academic theologians but I have not found analytical theology anywhere near as helpful as other branches of academic theology.)

However, it is time we recognise analytical theology has made its positive contribution to ecumenism because of pressure from local churches doing the spadework, building relationships despite the barriers erected by church hierarchies. Without this pressure I'm not convinced analytical theology would have made the progress it has. Indeed it is not unfair to note that it is academics, in service to church hierarchies, who consistently apply the brakes to relationships that would otherwise blossom without constraint.

What I want to do over this sequence of posts is to attempt to identify the problem the analytical theologians present to the ecumenical movements and the Christian faith as a whole.

Posted at 10:06 PM in Leadership, Theology, Theoretical Ecumenism | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, 05 May 2011

Divisive Theologies

Image via Wikipedia

In the final of three posts about ideas emerging from my comments on the passages in one light: one world, I pick up on the question of love between Christians in different churches.

How far is it possible? This may seem a pessimistic question but let me explain.

I thought for a long time, the main problem we have is ecclesiology. It is our ecclesiology which prevents structural unity. But now I'm not so sure structural unity is necessarily our primary goal.

I wonder whether theology is the greater division? One problem is, the success of British ecumenism means we are less aware of where the real divisions lie.

Whilst relationships are perfectly cordial between the traditional denominations, they are less so within them. There are two major English ecumenical institutions and the largest (at least in terms of staff which equates to wealth) is the Evangelical Alliance. They are largely reasonable Christians, that is not fundamentalists, who have profound difficulties with liberal theology (whatever that is).

Whilst the relationships are cordial, there is no real sense of convergence between these two branches of the faith. The churches are effectively sliced in two along ecumenical lines.

Whilst I believe I could personally find some common ground with some members of the Evangelical Alliance, it becomes harder at the extremes. Some fundamentalist views are hardly Christians at all, especially where they advocate violence.

I don't think I'm atypical in this matter and there are many who would be the mirror image of me. One insight that struck me forcibly, as I worked through one light: one world, was the demand we do not allow our theological divisions to separate us. This is particularly well argued by Paul in Romans 14, where he argues the weak should not condemn the strong and the strong should not despise the weak. The problem is of course, these days weak and strong don't meet at all.

I have to ask whether our successes have in fact distracted us from the main task. As our institutions focus on rapport, we lose sight of where the divisions are. Institutional unity seems to move the divisions elsewhere.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Diversity, Ecclesiology, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, 30 April 2011

Maintain the Unity of the Spirit

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world. If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts. This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Ephesians 4: 2 - 6

The author emphasises unity. There is one body, one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all.

From a 21st century perspective there are two ways of understanding this.

We could read it as saying there is one way of understanding scripture and the various takes on Christianity are in error. Some traditions would claim they represent this one way and all the others fall short of being the one true church. Others might think all traditions fall short. If so, the task is to negotiate our way to agreement about the one way.

The second way of reading this is to affirm all traditions as parts of the one church. No tradition alone is the one church but together the traditions are the one church. Whilst this is the most attractive to me, I know I need to exercise caution. Even where the lines I draw are intended to be inclusive, they are still lines. The question as ever is who is not included; who is marginalised by human schemes and human structures?

On the one hand I could argue traditions that self identify as non-Christian faiths do not know the one way. Alternatively I could argue all faiths participate to some degree. The problem then becomes to what degree do they need to participate? What about those we do not generally recognise as Christian but originate from Christianity, eg Seventh Day Adventism, Mormonism or Unitarianism?

This passage can be read exclusively and clearly the author intends this meaning because he is building up the communities reading this letter. Or it can be read inclusively, seeing the Christian traditions (which did not exist at the time the letter was written) as a single way. Taking either approach to extreme can lead us into making absurd claims.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Diversity, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, 28 April 2011

In the Light We Have Fellowship with One Another

Image by Roger Lynn via Flickr

1 John 1: 3 - 7

Read one of my earliest posts about Dark Holy Ground and put it alongside this passage. My question is 'what on earth does he mean by walking in the light'?

Many Christians experience walking with God in the dark. Often faith is tested in darkness and grows in the darkest places. Clearly, the imagery in the passage is very different; fellowship needs to be in the light.

The words 'in him there is no darkness at all' recall similar words from Psalm 139, words very much taken to heart in the Dark Holy Ground course. 'The darkness with you is no darkness at all, the night is as light as the day.' The imagery here is of darkness illuminated but still dark.

John believes there is no fellowship with God in the dark. Many who testify this is not true also experience light in darkness; things get really dark and yet the way is illuminated. We must struggle with this competing imagery of light and dark.

Where the dark is as light as the day, there is fellowship. People who experience this turn outwards, they are able to accompany and support others, to offer fellowship despite hardship. I'm not sure this is what John means but it is an insight we all need to carry with us.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, 05 April 2011

God's Gift of the Spirit

Image via Wikipedia

Ephesians 3: 14 - 16

The author prays for the church, that according to the riches of God's glory ... you may be strengthened ...

God's glory is the means by which we know God is present. God's glory is in the united community. To overcome divisions and function as a community, despite very real differences, is a sign of God's real presence.

We sometimes expect God to be manifested in miracles, defying the laws of nature. With these expectations, we lose sight of what God is actually saying or doing. When belief in miracles or hell becomes more important than the love we have for one another, something is wrong. When I criticise someone for being literalistic about the Bible, I am forgetting the pre-eminence of love.

The challenge, and the reason we all need to be strengthened, is learning to love with integrity. It is easy to feel I need to compromise my beliefs for others. Our challenge is to love others whilst remaining faithful to the vision of God each of us has experienced.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Diversity, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, 02 April 2011

For Building Up the Body of Christ

Image via Wikipedia

Ephesians 4: 7, 11 - 16

This builds on the previous passage. The point of disciplined listening and sharing is to attain maturity and the full stature of Christ. Note unity here is not something imposed through church structures but something which grows from genuine sharing of faith (v13).

The experience of unity flows from sharing between Christians of different traditions. In such sharing we learn of the ways we are deceived by our doctrines, tricks and schemes.

And as we overcome out delusions we find the body is joined and knitted together. The body builds itself up in love.

One problem ecumenists have is ecumenical reception. The councils of the churches make an agreement but have difficulty passing it on to local churches. The problem is where a formal agreement is imposed on others not party to it.

It is no surprise formal conversations have had a high degree of success. Of course they have. When Christians get together and share they will find common ground. The problems start when successful leaders impose their findings on others.

The body builds itself in love.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Conversations, Diversity, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, 01 April 2011

Not Disorder, but Peace

Image by ESP Indonesia via Flickr

1 Corinthians 14: 31 - 33

This passage tells us we are indeed different and so need to organise ourselves accordingly. If we prophesy one by one, then we will hear something new, we will learn and be encouraged by the breadth of faith expressed.

Peace is not a result of uniformity but of a disciplined approach to faith. Our call is to learn to listen to others and in turn share our own experience of God.

Much talk of unity ignores the impossibility of knowing God fully. No one tradition can possibly embrace all there is to know of faith. Indeed, if we put every tradition's understanding of God together we would still not know God.

The task is to perceive God in the here and now. To do this we can pool our experience. We need to do this in a disciplined and so peaceful way.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Diversity, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, 31 March 2011

All Together in One Place

Image by Lawrence OP via Flickr

Acts 2: 1 - 6

It is a fallacy to believe this story illustrates the unity of the Church. Pentecost is always seen as the birthday of the Church but what do we find?

A flame divides into a number of flames. The people speak in different languages; although from all over the known world, they hear their own languages. They do not all understand a single language.

This reads to me as an affirmation of diversity. I cannot see a mandate for unity as a single organisational structure.

Organisational unity is a lazy way of understanding unity; 'if only we all agreed, then we would have unity'. It is much more rewarding to be united with those with whom we disagree.

The assumption is God seeks unity in the sense of a single structure but where is the evidence? The challenge is to love one another, not to become like one another.

There is another thing too. What about the dissenters, the marginalised? Where do they fit into the single full, visible and unified church? The static model of unity does not take into account the dynamic of love.

Posted at 06:00 PM in Diversity, Exegesis, Theology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, 30 March 2011

Let All the Peoples' Praise Him

Image via Wikipedia

Romans 15: 10 - 11

This final passage, from the section of 'one light: one world' headed 'Christ's work in bringing us into unity', is something of mystery.

The burden of the message seems to be now gentiles are admitted into the faith, they can join all peoples in praising God.

Churches Together in England has selected these passages to encourage us to reflect upon how we may all be one. Some of them don't make any especial connection to ecumenism for me and this one in particular seems to be something of a space filler.

One thing I can do is use the opportunity afforded by the last line 'let all the peoples praise him' to reflect upon one theme that has emerged from this section of passages.

That is the theme of 'glory'. As I understand it, the glory of God is the means by which we are made aware of the presence of God. God is not accessible to our senses and so we need signs of God. These signs represent the real presence of God.

In a way the halo is one way artists have tried to depict God's glory. It is a metaphor for something more difficult to define.

What John 17 seems to be saying is unity is the glory of God. It is the ultimate reconciliation of all things. It can be prefigured in the church and the divided church is our opportunity to demonstrate the glory of God, being united despite our differences. Ecumenism is the laboratory in which the churches experiment with unity.

When we are prepared to take responsibility for unity, by being prepared to risk our own integrity in order to embrace the other, then we see God's glory. This is what the early gentile Christians experienced and what gave them cause to praise God.