December 22, 2010
Why Theology Doesn’t Matter
Ha! As if I would really say that theology doesn’t matter. But, since I have you hooked, I will sort of deliver. No bait and switch at my blog!
Karl Barth said that theology is crucial for the church, but not necessarily for the individual. What he meant was that every Christian does not have to be a theologian. He or she does not have to read academic books on topics like “the Atonement” or ”Hermeneutics” to really be a Christian. This is because our faith is ultimately personal and it comes about through a personal experience without regard to someone’s level of education or desire to spend hours reading books.
You can experience the truth and power of Christ without understanding everything about it. In the same way you can drive a car without knowing what is under the hood. A common mistake among theology enthusiasts is to act like every true Christian must also be interested in the specialized questions of theology. Not so. Everyone can drive a car.
But the analogy begs a question towards the second part of Barth’s saying, which is that the church as a whole absolutely needs theology. You may be ok with being an agnostic about what’s under the hood of your car, but boy are you glad that someone knew how to engineer that marvel and that someone also knows how to fix it when it breaks down. The church needs theology because there is a definite shape to our faith. It is one thing and not another (there is a car, with an engine and it has parts that work together). Theology gives definition to everything that the church is an should be. It also explains what it has been and what it shouldn’t be. Another way of saying this is that every Christian enjoys the fruits of theology, whether they know it or not. Theology is the task of defining and refining who we are as Christians.
TBC…
Facebook
RSS
9 Responses to Why Theology Doesn’t Matter
I am vindicated! By Karl Barth, no less….
You’re making me nervous, Scott. What exactly are you feeling vindicated about?
I’ve often found myself surrounded by deep thinkers. But it seems that most deep thinkers delve into realms of theology and docterine. My position is somewhat contrarian: that we can be deeply experiential without having to be deeply analytical. It is as if we can have a deep relationship with God without having to explain all the depth of God. My depth with God is not dependent on the depth of my intellect. But the opposite seems to be the tendency of some deep thinkers, that the further and older we become as believes, the more we must gain mastery of our understanding of the mysteries of God. In my experience anyway.
“Deep thinking” has been in some ways co-opted by academic theology? Or by theology as an academic discipline?
But, can we be analytical and experiential too? Or does analysis inherently kill experience? Am I already spoiling things by asking too many questions? What is the truth, Scott! (please provide footnotes in the Turabian style)
Turabian, cute. How do I cite my own personal experience? One college prof told me “Those who do not quote will never be quoted…”
I have become more adept at being both experiential and anlytical as I’ve grown older. Perhaps someday soon I will perfect the technique, write a book about it, and retire to an obscure village in Switzerland to analyze my exerience of tranquility and rest.
Yes, I hope we can be both, even at the risk of both compromising the other. Some of the Psalms do this well, plunging and plumbing the vastness of all that is, God.
I think the strength of experience is also it’s achillian weakness: I can have certain “experiences” which lend myself to certain conclusions or beliefs that are antithetical to God, that are in contradiction to God. In this respect, I have to maintain a constabular restraint, and it is my analysis that serves me well. In practical terms: in the throes of ecstatic praise, the experience outpaced my reason, and I came to understand that there is nothing I can do that would displace God’s grace, cleansing, forgiveness in my life, wow, now I can do anything I want. Well, of course, it takes only a moment to offer a serious challenge to this obvious errant conclusion. Most people can quickly grasp this model. But I suggest the inverse is an equally valid consideration: I can study the depths of God’s mercy, but if I do not extend mercy to the one who offends me, then it’s all a wasted effort. Anyone who has been truly offended can understand how difficult that can be sometimes, and how experiential that encounter would be.
I submit the following: that it is more difficult for most believers to live in the first model, that of experience driving, reason and analysis navigating. There seems to be some fear, as if a person not governed and controlled by reason (which is the birthplace of theology and docterine for the “church”), will absolutely end up confused and wandering.
I live mostly in the first model, that of experience being the wind in my sails, energy and transformation, revival and renewal, and my analysis doing good labor with a hand on the tiller.
Thanks for reading, I think I’ve wandered a bit in my comments, but, Oh, what an experience!
Good Discussion…
That just rocks, Scott. Driven by the sails of experience… I’m going to move in next you in that Alpine village, btw. I do plan to work in my retirement, thought. Mostly walking to the mailbox and collecting royalty checks. Do they even have mailboxes in secluded alpine villages?
I agree but I completely disagree! Thesis – (what you said). Antithesis – most people DO NOT operate in the second model. Time after time it is confirmed that the vast majority of Christians are not so much driven by the sails of experience as sailing three sheets to the wind. Experience completely drives their understanding of God and faith.There is no rudder, there is no anchor, the compass has been gleefully tossed overboard , and the stars are hidden by high flying clouds. But! Synthesis – I think that his is the *unexamined *experiential life of the majority. I think that when people do get around to thinking through this relationship between experience and reason then, yes, you are right, the tendency is to “go overboard” on defining and on control. I’ve also seen this happen too. The shift from relational thinking to systematic thinking. Still I insist on coming back to this: the problem is never thinking in itself, but particular ways of thinking.
We are approachin *terra incognita. *Here there be dragons.
[...] the Theological Hand that Feeds You In my previous ironically titled post “Why theology doesn’t matter” I said that it actually does. It provides the structure, the context and the content of the [...]
[...] Why Theology Doesn’t Matter [...]
[...] theologically and philosophically to non-academic people. But, remember what Rob says in “Why theology doesn’t matter”: Every Christian can experience his/her faith without understanding everything about [...]