Richard Dawkins whether wonders Theology is a subject at all, and a friend asks whether someone doing theology can ever get it wrong.
So what is theology? The first thing to say is that Theology is not doctrine/dogma. Doctrine and it development over the centuries is one of the objects of study within the academic discipline of theology, but it is not theology.
As an under graduate I studied the core areas as well as the options around that core. The core subjects with the academic discipline of theology are doctrine and its development, the critical study the New Testament and Hebrew Scriptures, the philosophy of religion, the history of the religion of Israel and the history of Christianity. Within the latter history the first five centuries are a key area of study within the subject of theology. In all these areas the same critical rigour one finds in any other of the liberal arts subject is taught.
That is certainly how theology is taught in British Universities.
I wonder sometimes why Richard Dawkins doesn’t know this, he only need visit the faculty web pages of his own University to find out.
For me Theology is the critical study of religion, religious beliefs and practices, the development of belief and belief in contemporary society. To study theology one must learn how to be an historian and anthropologist, a philosopher and linguist but most of all one must learn to be critical of one’s own beliefs and the beliefs of others. The first essay I given as an undergraduate was titled, ‘Old Testament Study demands a combination of faith and reason. Discuss.’ The readings set for the essay were in themselves an introduction the critical thinking.
So that’s what academic theology is all about, but what of my friends question Can someone doing theology get it wrong? In the academy as with any other subject it is possible to get it wrong, any one saying Nestorius was a monophysite, has got the wrong answer.
I sense however that that is not what my friend means. You see to Athanasius, Arius was wrong because he denied the divinity of Christ whereas to Arius, Athanasius was wrong because Athanasius proclaimed Christ’s divinity. But these are just religious opinions of which we can ask; ‘What would it take to disconfirm this opinion?’ If the answer is, ‘Nothing’ they can be treated as what they are opinion and no more. Yet even here logic and reason are not redundant. Opinions even when un-falsifiable must be consistent with one another. So whilst both Nestorius and Cyril agreed with Athanasius, Nestorius got it wrong because he would not accept the logical correlate of Christ’s divinity, namely the doctrine that Mary was the theotokos, the bearer or mother of God. If Mary is not the God bearer, then who is Christ? One can’t accept one opinion without accepting the other. These are still opinions, but they form part of a logically consistent set of opinions. Can you do theology and get it wrong? Sort of.
When we do theology in the church we are reflecting upon all what has been believed in the past and reflecting also on what has changed in our understanding of the world today. From those reflections the church continues to create a meaningful narrative by which it can live its life of faith. But the theological narrative should never be a fixed narrative. It is narrative that is still in the process of formation and as such is never the final word. Whilst this narrative theology can never be wholly right, its very falsifiablility should ensure its continued place at the heart of the community of faith and doubt (the Church).
To finish then two statements on the dangers of theology, both of which have been addressed to me by religious conservatives.
‘Don’t go and study theology, theology will lead you away cross.’
‘The problem with the study of theology is that people who start it begin with a simple faith and end up with complex doubts.’
If that is true, then the friends of reason have nothing to fear and everything to applaud in the study of Theology.
Wednesday 8 December 2010
Tuesday 7 December 2010
Jesus advises John to look at the evidence,
Matthew 11:2-11 NRSV
When John heard in prison what the Messiah was doing, he sent word by his disciples and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?” Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.”
As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes? Look, those who wear soft robes are in royal palaces. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written, ‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.’ Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
The theme for the third Sunday in Advent is the forerunner of Jesus: John the Baptist.
The first thing to note is that John, now in prison, may be having doubts about his understanding of who Jesus is, for he sends a message to Jesus saying “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?”
Here we see John doubting his own conviction. This should not disturb us.
To quote Joan Chittister "Doubt is what leaves us open to truth, wherever it is, however difficult it may be to accept. Without doubt, life would simply be a series of packaged assumptions, none of them tested, none of them sure, and all of them belonging not to us, but to someone else whose truth we have made our own."
John, here, is asking a question. So should we. Jesus, in turn, responds by saying “Go and tell John what you hear and see.” In other words, he says look at the evidence. The blind receive their sight, the lame walk… and so on.
So, in this first paragraph, we have a paradigm, an example of how we might proceed. Doubt elicits a question, and the response to the question is to demand that we look at the evidence. Notwithstanding the nature of the evidence which some in the modern world will find difficult to receive, never the less there is a clear critical approach here. Doubt creates questions which require evidence in order to be satisfied. So much for the first paragraph.
In the second paragraph, Jesus asks the question about John:
“What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? What did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes?”
The implication is of course neither. People were not coming into the desert to look at the desert nor to find princes in their fine robes. No, they had gone to find a prophet, which is no more than somebody who speaks truth to a situation. Prophetes means ‘the one who appears on behalf of.’ and the Hebrew word ‘Nabi’ is ‘the one inspired to speak’. Both speak into contemporary situations. Prophesy is not primarily about prediction.
The message of John and Jesus is very simple: Repent. Change the way you look at the world. It seems to me that this repentance, this change, is a continuous process, because change in thinking will always follow changes in understanding. And changes in understanding will often be the result of some new piece of information, some previously unknown evidence.
What is it you hear? What is it you see? How does that change the way you understand the world?
When John heard in prison what the Messiah was doing, he sent word by his disciples and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?” Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.”
As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes? Look, those who wear soft robes are in royal palaces. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written, ‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.’ Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
The theme for the third Sunday in Advent is the forerunner of Jesus: John the Baptist.
The first thing to note is that John, now in prison, may be having doubts about his understanding of who Jesus is, for he sends a message to Jesus saying “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?”
Here we see John doubting his own conviction. This should not disturb us.
To quote Joan Chittister "Doubt is what leaves us open to truth, wherever it is, however difficult it may be to accept. Without doubt, life would simply be a series of packaged assumptions, none of them tested, none of them sure, and all of them belonging not to us, but to someone else whose truth we have made our own."
John, here, is asking a question. So should we. Jesus, in turn, responds by saying “Go and tell John what you hear and see.” In other words, he says look at the evidence. The blind receive their sight, the lame walk… and so on.
So, in this first paragraph, we have a paradigm, an example of how we might proceed. Doubt elicits a question, and the response to the question is to demand that we look at the evidence. Notwithstanding the nature of the evidence which some in the modern world will find difficult to receive, never the less there is a clear critical approach here. Doubt creates questions which require evidence in order to be satisfied. So much for the first paragraph.
In the second paragraph, Jesus asks the question about John:
“What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? What did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes?”
The implication is of course neither. People were not coming into the desert to look at the desert nor to find princes in their fine robes. No, they had gone to find a prophet, which is no more than somebody who speaks truth to a situation. Prophetes means ‘the one who appears on behalf of.’ and the Hebrew word ‘Nabi’ is ‘the one inspired to speak’. Both speak into contemporary situations. Prophesy is not primarily about prediction.
The message of John and Jesus is very simple: Repent. Change the way you look at the world. It seems to me that this repentance, this change, is a continuous process, because change in thinking will always follow changes in understanding. And changes in understanding will often be the result of some new piece of information, some previously unknown evidence.
What is it you hear? What is it you see? How does that change the way you understand the world?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)