This is hilarious. I've just been reading through some of my first entries in here a couple years ago. My, how I've changed.
Do you know, I used to think the reason there was so much diversity in the world was because of a lack of authority? The way I saw it, there's one truth. obviously. The holders of this one truth are probably the Presbies, and they get it from the Bible (though really, from Augustine, Luther and subsequent male, "Reformed" followers of these men). Christians are on their way to that one truth, but early on in people's spiritual growth, they're stupid, and they start forming their own ideas without consulting the Presbies, and so they get all messed up and then teach other people their messed up ideas. Goodness, I am articulate tonight. Anyway, it's a laughing stock, really. How easy it was for me to believe that I had been blessed with the one truth and everyone else was just misinformed. I mean, I used to see diversity, the fact that different people read the Bible in different ways and see different things as the main thing, as a problem. Now, it is my favorite thing.
Just now, I am wondering if I am full of crap, dancing around using words that sound appealing to me, but not being true to any of the substance behind them. Diversity is still hard for me. I mean, I am ok with the fact that Jesus can be something other than King, or Savior, that he can be co-sufferer, that God can be she, that God's sovereignty can come from his infusing all of the universe instead of from lording over it, I'm ok with differing sexual ethics and homosexuality, with Pentecostalism in Latin America and Africa, evolution, Gnosticism. But. I can't stand people who aren't. That's not true, I love plenty of people that aren't ok with those things. But I sure don't like that they're not ok with it. Is that really inclusive? I can't tell. That's the thing with being inclusive, isn't it. You have to exclude those excluders, can't stand em. Even after all my mind-expanding, I am still only capable of loving and appreciating those things that resonate inside of me. It's just that a whole lot more resonates in me now.
I am wondering, here, if I'm full of crap for using these trendy words, because I was furious at my dad this weekend for using trendy words (a different set of them) that really mean nothing. Absolute truth, Jesus is the only way, Jesus as personal savior, biblical. They're vagueries. Evangelicals use them to comfort themselves with the illusion of certainty, but when you get down to it, you aren't sure what you mean by them, and they could mean lots of things. Whenever I ask an evangelical to tell me one absolute truth, they think for a minute, and then give me "Jesus is the only way." When I ask what they mean, they say "you have to believe Jesus was the Son of God to be saved." I ask them why this is what "Jesus is the only way" means. They aren't sure. I think, really, what evangelicals mean by absolute truth is that you're safe if you believe a couple bullet points (1. I'm crappy, 2. Jesus died for me), or that women shouldn't have short hair, or that sex is bad, or a million other things. What I mean is, it's more of a cheap way to universalize one's own preferences and hermeneutical strategies than a real, concrete, guiding principle. I may believe in absolute truth, but I am more aware of my obstacles in reaching it, and I'm more appreciative of my particularities that color it. If you ask me, it's much better to be aware of those things than to feel like I'm certain.
I am being too honest.
Finally, here is a good place to quote this Ruether passage I've been wanting to quote. To my father:
"There has been a tendency to treat this 'principle of experience' as unique to feminist theology...and to see it as distant from 'objective' sources of truth of classical theologies. This seems to be a misunderstanding of the experimental base of all theological reflection. What have been called the objective sources of theology: Scripture and tradition, are themselves codified collective human experience."
-Rosemary Radford Ruether
3 comments:
It sounds like you spend your time being uncertain about everything. Congratulations! You've passed the first test in being just the dhimmified psuedo-Christian beloved by both the oncoming Islamic armada and the relentless engines of political correctness.
If dogmatic theology is a comfortable numbness, what then the straitjacket of moral relativism, that keeps time in merely finding new oddities to embrace and accept? It is the designer drug which attempts to reconcile the individual to a thousand rebellions and in so doing, leaves the holder incapable of holding to anything at all. But it is not void of effect.
It leaves behind a numbness and a sense of moral superiority (ironically enough). That is the reason why you can't stand people who are not as fractured as yourself -- you are better than they.
It is so commonplace that it's scriptable. The Nietzchean supermen find solace in their acceptance of all the trifling traits of the unwashed masses, rising above their petty theologies and words, washing them away with a few chosen words of a verbal magic wand, and becomes a law and an idol to themselves.
Dear Mr. Shadows -
It sounds like you've got me pegged. Well done. Sorry if I'm too predictably postmodern for you. I'm sure if I took a gander at your blog, it'd feel nauseatingly conservative to me. That's fine.
I feel like most things I could say in response would just be attempts to defend my personal integrity and credibility, and I'm not really interested in that.
But I'll say this: I am much more satisfied with the truth I've found than with the truth I used to cling to. I am thankful that I've taken the risk of listening to different perspectives without assuming they're wrong from the start. It has expanded my world, and it has helped me to recognize that the reason there are differences in the world isn't because everyone else is wrong, or that they haven't read John Piper yet. It's because truth is, by its nature, worthless unless embedded in the ins and outs of human experience, which varies so vastly that we'll never all see the same. That's why you find it more reasonable to believe in absolutes and dogmatic theology: because your reason and experience tell you it makes more sense. Same with me for my perspective. Thank goodness we have a Bible that recognizes this, and includes centuries of dissenting voices. If only our churches could be so inclusive.
Don't you think you're better than me because you like dogmatics and I'm sickeningly postmodern? Is there a problem with admitting that we've inhabited our perspectives for a reason, that we think our own is more satisfying than the others we've seen, which sometimes results in a bit of arrogance from time to time?
This is a clumsy response, but what I'm saying is: from where you're standing, all you see is the weakneses is my perspective, and they are not the whole story. Everything looks laughable when reduced to a caricature. And it's a shame that you miss out on the beauty of plurality just because you won't give it a close look.
(Not that I know how close you've looked at it, but by your sweeping dismissals, I can only assume ignorance.)
wasn't jesus a relativist when he saved mary magdalene from being stoned to death? the law said she should be stoned, but he prevented that from happening. that's almost like a modern day lawyer telling a judge and jury not to execute a convicted murderer because no one is without sin. the majority would laugh at the lawyer and say he was a nut. that's exactly what happened to jesus.
jesus might be the only way, but isn't jesus in everyone? what i mean by this is god uses everyone for his purpose (good or bad). so if god is using a buddhist and i happen to find some connection to god through this buddhist, what does it matter? even if jesus is not in the buddhist, god can use him how ever he pleases.
when jesus said he was the way to god, he was saying that what he taught was the way to god. the message he was preaching transcended the person of jesus. so if someone else has the message of jesus without knowing jesus (yes, that is possible), then it appears as though the person is going to god by means other than jesus. in reality, they are going to god through the message that jesus taught and that message can be found in many places.
sorry for such a long post.
Post a Comment