Theology Denied

The early church was deeply divided. In time, many of the issues were decided, but only after the church had carried out a rigorous theological analysis that continued for centuries.

Our church is also divided. At present, the issue is sexuality. I have yet to see, however, a theological analysis that lays bare the differences that underlie the various views. For example, the publication by Virginia Seminary, A Wholesome Example, contains biblical, pastoral, historical material relating to sexuality but no theological section. The House of Bishops study document, Continuing the Dialogue has no theological section. A recent text, Our Selves, Our Souls and Bodies, has no sustained theological analysis. A sustained theological analysis would take differing positions and world- views, articulate their basic content and assumptions, and relate them to fundamental doctrines such as Trinity and Christology.

Why is there so little theological analysis? In part, the reasons are cultural. As a nation we are anti-intellectual, pragmatic, and pluralistic. Theology is an intellectual discipline. It's norms are such things as Scripture and tradition. It is not impressed with success. It sets boundaries. The Nicene Creed is the perfect example. It defined certain positions as orthodox and others as heresy. Terms like "orthodox" or "heresy" sound exclusive and narrow-minded in our present context.

Furthermore, theology has become the purview of specialists, academics with credentials. Clergy and laity often find themselves on the sideline as experts and authorities produce a steady stream of conflicting opinions. The issues appear so complex and technical that the average church member is tempted to leave it to the experts. Some of these church members, however, will vote in conventions on matters of faith and morals.

Finally, theology is difficult. It articulates implicit and only partially conscious world-views. These deep structures are hard to express and difficult to understand in others who differ from us. Theology isn't entertainment. It requires effort with little immediate gratification.

Beginning about two centuries ago there was a profound revision of the Christian faith. Schleiermacher led the way. He and others redefined the faith to avoid a belief in miracles and the supernatural. It led to what Hans Frei called "the decline of the biblical narrative," and in theology, to redefinitions which denied such things as the bodily resurrection of Jesus. In response to these changes other alternatives were formulated, one of the best being Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics.

Before the church goes any further it would be wise to understand the differences between Schleiemacher and Barth. That isn't happening. Schleiermacher's thought is compatible with contemporary culture. The "liberal" forces in the church appreciate his vision. Many have already assimilated his thought through such theologians as Tillich and Macquarrie. Barth is more difficult. He critiques the prevailing view. His thought is not widely understood, by liberals or conservatives.

Rather than do its homework, the church is being tempted to abandon theology. As a result, the church will drift toward schism, or proclaim a "truth of community" in which all opinions are presumably synthesized into a tapestry of "divine truth." That view is fatal.

There are many gifts for ministry, among them theology. I am convinced that many people, clergy and lay, can do theology and teach others. You don't have to be an expert to do it. It is God's call. Please pray about this and act accordingly. (Plenteous Harvest, May, 1998.)

Articles

Theology Denied

Theology