playful theology

We have long regarded the work of theology to be a serious task to be left only to professionals. In my estimation, we presume much if we believe that our “professional theologians” have what it takes to master the Divine. When you really stop to think about it, theology (the study of God and his ways!) has become only another modernist attempt to subjugate all things to the scientific method. The whole enterprise must be seen as, on one level, humorous and on another, quite silly. Further, it is equally naïve to think that we can ever free ourselves from context when we do theology; we cannot escape the world we live in. So our supposed “objective theology” is shown to be quite contextual- namely the Western, white, protestant males of a certain class, perspective and agenda. The gravity with which we have handled theology must be replaced with an honest playfulness, because our current systems of conquest and control “constitute something of an emergency.” (W. Brueggemann) It is dangerous, presumptuous and ridiculous to stay where we are. Isn't this all the language of relationship? Not a quest to "figure out" the other, but to have a relational encounter filled with gratitude, awe and delight (D. Allender).

not surprised

check out this great post by my friend chuck. it's a facinating read about disney ripping off a japanese artist for "the lion king" story... i love conspiracy theories.

Text and Story

The Bible constitutes the text of our faith community. In being such, it is essential to our understanding of who we are for it tells our Story. We are in the nasty habit of using the Bible to prove our views and refute those views that threaten our own instead of letting the Bible speak anew for itself. We have been doing this ever since the church bowed its head to science, thereby hardening theology into a series of propositional “truths.” The biblical narrative (our family Story) became the dispensable "chaff" out of which doctrinal “nuggets” were lifted and then exported around the world. “A theology which has as its point of reference only ‘truths’ which have been established ‘once in for all’- and not the Truth which is also the Way- can only be static and in the long run, sterile” (Gustavo Gutierrez). Why must we subjugate the Text to scientific, objective empiricism? Can we release the Bible to be what it claims to be, free from the rule of modernity and our own agenda? How can we read the Living Word of God and let it speak into our context?

surreal

my wife stumbled across this photo-journal blog of the katrina aftermath: eye of the storm. also of note is a site linked off of the first: vincent laforet photography. walking through the pictures seems like taking a tour of a sci-fi-ish world of total and complete devastation...

smart guys

Walter Brueggemann & Douglas John Hall
i'm taking a class this semester called "constructing the theological mosaic." in it i've had the opportunity to learn not only under my professor, dr. colline greene, but also from the texts i'm required to read. the first one up for recommendation is Texts Under Negotiation: The Bible and the Postmodern Imagination by Brueggemann. yes, it is provocative as it sounds; a great read for beginning to develop an understanding of postmodern hermeneutics. the second title you should read is Thinking the Faith: Christian Theology in a North American Context by canadian author Hall. it is the first in a three volume set inviting us to consider what our specific story as north americans has contributed positively/negatively to our formation of theology. both men are looking at the christian faith, specifically our theological systems and our view of the bible, from an after-modernity stance, call it postmodern or whatever. the main point is that neither should go unheard. good stuff.

what do you really want?

anthropology, sociology and psychology have all spent much energy around the question of what is man's basic drive? what is our basic desire? what is our core need? answers have varied from the brute drives of hunger and sexual satisfaction (happiness) to the survival of the fittest and dominance over others (security). a christian, trinitarian theology offers a radically different perspective: "The need for relationship is fundamental to human nature, perhaps the most fundamental need" (d.benner). as relational beings, created in the image of a trinitarian God, this is our deepest core need. but not only do we just seek relationships, we seek good ones. this is our longing as we look back to the garden, look forward towards redemption, and look each other in the eyes right now.

thoughts inspired by David Benner's The Incarnation as a Metaphor for Psychotharapy. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 1983.

the only place to start

tell me who i am

It has always been the bizarre, the unusual, the unfathomable- yes the mysterious that fascinates us. We nod and approve of the normal; but we are captivated, drawn in by mystery. And this should come as no great shock, for it is precisely the madness of a single event in history that has provided the whole of humanity with an ontological reference point: the incarnation of Christ. Ray Anderson says it well: “The incarnation is the hermeneutical horizon for authentic personhood. All answers to questions about the nature of the human in terms of what it is to be a person must be derived from this event.”

four years

All empires eventually expire
and when they finally do it's never pretty.
So just sit back and wait for the attacks,
especially in the major cities.
Please hold my hand Sweetheart.
Daddy's got you. Momma's out in the car,
and she packed your favorite blue shoes.
Here they come exploding like the sun,
ringing in my ears like independence.
I agree this doesn't favor me,
still bullies ought to get what's coming.

Major Cities by David Bazan of Headphones

dwarf vs untitled: how may i be of service?

image copyright: nellis, 2005

contextualized theology

i am becoming enchanted with the ideas surrounding what it means to develop and live theology in the particularity of one's context. what does it mean to do theology in the west? in north america? in the u.s.? in the urban context of seattle? collin green, an irish professor of mine, made the statment in class that if we are to begin thinking theologically in america, we must first address the myth of the "american dream" because it requires that we see failure as intolerable, pain as something to be avoided. the "american dream" instills in us a pridful attitude of entitlement. as i was driving home from class, i tuned into npr news to hear the president make a comment that served as a perfect illustration of my professor's point. as he was referring to the horrific tragedy along the gulf coast, bush said that he was unwilling to refer to those who are suffering as "refugees" because they are not "refugees," they are "americans." i almost had to pull over to the side of the road... wow! what does it mean to be an american if we can no longer identify with the world in suffering? where is the solidarity to be had with the victims of the tsunami? or with those who exist post-any crisis? why are we unwilling to hold our own brokenness and in doing so step into an embrace with humanity? and ultimatly... how do we begin to develop and live a theology in a nation such as this?

spread thin

a leaf turns today as i begin classes and enter an entirely new season of life- with increased responsibilities. to be honest, i feel a bit small in the face of all these that require more of me than i feel is available at times. my desire is to give fully of myself to each, to be entirely present for every face, at every encounter. i am thankful for all of you who pray on our behalf- you are needed.

closer