The Wilderness Way #2

2. The Theological Wilderness

We live in a theological wilderness of uncertainty. There is not a clear trumpet that sounds the call of orthodoxy for the old mainline denominations. To paraphrase from I Samuel, the world of the Lord is rare in these days; visions are not widespread.1

Mainliners are clear that they are not fundamentalist. They often know with some vehemence what they are against (i.e. rigid fundamentalism exemplified by Jerry Falwell and his ilk). What they struggle mightily to do is define a new theological identity in an age of religious anarchy. On more than one occasion this writer has heard a well-intended Methodist (both clergy and lay) say something like “I’m a Methodist. I can believe whatever I want.” Church law in The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church clearly states otherwise. “United Methodists profess the historic Christian faith in God, incarnate in Jesus Christ for our salvation and ever at work in human history in the Holy Spirit.”2 And yet, despite its official stance, the entire issue of what constitutes both core beliefs and core practice remains up for grabs.

One of the great Christian leaders in the 20th century was the missionary, bishop, evangelist and theologian Lesslie Newbigin. He made his mark in courageous and pioneering work spreading the gospel and speaking out for justice in India. Two decades ago in Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture, Newbigin wrote as a cultural analysis that “The result is not, as we once imagined, a secular society. It is a pagan society, and its paganism, having been born out of the rejection of Christianity, is far more resistant to the gospel than the pre-Christian paganism with which cross Christian missions have been familiar.”3

Late in life this great Christian leader returned home to his native Britain. William Abraham, in his perceptive work The Logic of Renewal, conveys some of Newbigin’s insights. He writes: “A moving point of entry into Newbigin’s thinking about the prospects for the church in the West can be found in the penultimate chapter of his memoirs. In 1979, Newbigin found himself presiding over the Birmingham District Council of the United Reformed Church. In the course of the meeting, they had to face the possibility of closing an old church outside Winson Green prison. Newbigin could not contemplate such a decision. In the end, he became the pastor on a part-time basis.

‘“On 2 January I was duly installed and since then I have been struggling to fulfill the obligations of this ministry. It is much harder than anything I met in India. There is a cold contempt for the gospel which is harder to face than opposition. As I visit the Asian homes in the district, most of them Sikhs of Hindus, I find a welcome, which is often denied on the doorsteps of the natives.

‘“I have been forced to recognize that the most difficult missionary frontier in the contemporary world is the one of which the Churches have been — on the whole — so little conscious, the frontier that divides the world of biblical faith from the world whose values and beliefs are ceaselessly fed into every home on the television screen. Life others I have been accustomed, especially in the 1960s, to speak of England as a secular society. I have now come to realize that I was the easy victim of an illusion from which my reading of the Gospels should have saved me. No room remains empty for long. If God is driven out, the gods come trooping in. England is a pagan society and the development of a truly missionary encounter with this very tough form of paganism is the greatest intellectual and practical task facing the church.’”4

To our great consternation the gods have rushed in. Polytheism has reemerged in hidden guise. There are the standard culprits of materialism, hedonism, racism, power, greed and the like. In a profound sense they are always present. What is different in these times is the assertion that basic standards of judgment largely no longer apply. The very claim to “Truth” as standing above and in some sense beyond our human pretension and cultural claims is in dispute. Pilate’s age old question “What is truth?”5 is being asked again in dramatically new ways.

Today, more than ever before, we are aware of challenges to a Christo-centric view of reality. Appropriately C. David Grant writes: “Part of the Enlightenment’s quest for sameness was the hope that a single religion could absorb the many religions of the world. For some, this was a hope that Christianity could be shown to be the most advanced and, hence, the best expressed of the world’s religions.”6 Most are deeply aware of the failure of this quest. For a time it appeared that through examination of the various phenomenological aspects of religion some form of common ground might be established. While there are phenomenological similarities, we are increasingly aware of the fact that the world’s great religions are competing truth claims. At their core, they are mutually exclusive. And yet, our current state of cultural relativism works to deny such reality.

I recall taking a required course in Methodist Doctrine and Polity taught by the great 20th century theologian Albert C. Outler at Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University. Carefully, Professor Outler laid out the notion that the fence line for Methodist doctrine was wide, very wide but that there was clearly a fence line. More recently Professor Justo Gonzales in introducing a popular new theology class for the United Methodist Church called Christian Believer employs a baseball imagery to describe core theological concepts.

He states that doctrinal truth exists between the foul lines. Like Outler, Gonzales is willing to allow for a generously wide field. There is plenty of room between right foul and left foul lines. However, he insists that the foul lines do exist. In the theological wilderness of today’s Methodism the very notion of foul lines is up for grabs. The famous Methodist quadrilateral (Scripture, tradition, reason and experience) offered as a theological method threatens to replace the content of doctrine. “It is fascinating that after 1968 the Doctrines and Discipline becomes merely the Book of Discipline. It is difficult to imagine a more telling symbol of the deep shift which took place among United Methodists.”7 Furthermore, the quadrilateral is often reduced to a bilateral or simply the citation of one point of the quadrilateral to support a predetermined position.

Quite famously John Wesley said, “But as to all opinions which do hot strike at the root of Christianity, we think and let think.”8 Such a grand theological stance as John Wesley’s presumes that there are in fact roots. Those who quote Wesley’s openness with such ease fail to properly understand the context, which he addresses. He could assume a mother church steeped in ethos, ethic and theology of Christendom. Today we can make no such assumption. Indeed, another Wesley quote, a plea really, is more apropos. “I am sick of opinions. I am weary to bear them. My soul loathes this frothy food. Give me solid and substantial religion. Give me a humble, gentle lover of God and man.”9

The Wilderness Way ... to be continued

Bishop Mike Lowry

Footnotes:

1. I Samuel 3:1

2. The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church 2004, paragraph 101, p. 41

3. Lesslie Newbigin, The Foolishness to the Greeks, p. 20

4. William J. Abraham, The Logic of Renewal, p. 26 (internal citation: Lesslie Newbigin, Unfinished Agenda, p. 249)

5. John 18:38

6. C. David Grant, Thinking Through Our Faith, p. 61

7. William J. Abraham, Waking from Doctrinal Amnesia, p. 45

8. Albert C. Outler, ed. The Works of John Wesley, p. 34

9. Albert C. Outler, ed. The Works of John Wesley, p. 321

_________________________________________________________________________________

By: Bishop Mike Lowry On 10/31/2008

Topics: Bishop Columns