What is it that makes up a group? Is it that
a group shares the same traits of identity? Is
it that a group share common beliefs despite
their own personal identities? What makes up
a group? Is it a group in which everyone thinks
the same way? Or is a group one that all behaves
a certain way? What about the church? Is the
church a group of individuals that all believe
the same thing, or is it a group that, despite
the diverse characteristics of the individuals
involved, decide to all behave the same way?
Can it be one and not the other? Can it be both?
This week on the Semi -Seminarian, we take on
the subject, the impact of systematic theology
on the church and the impact of practical theology
of the church. and try and conclude what's the
best path forward for the church in the 21st
century. This week, we try to figure out, where
do we go from here? Through my own spiritual
journey, I've just come to believe that the church
And when I say the church, I mean the church
with a capital C. Not your congregation specifically
or my church specifically, but the church. The
one that we're all, all of us Christians, the
one that we consider ourselves a part of. The
church. It can either have a hierarchy, a top
-down approach to power and identity and belief,
or it can be faithful to the gospel message.
Not at the same time, it can't have both. The
truth is, the church can have the kingdom of
the earth, which it's had several times in its
existence, or it can have the kingdom of God
on earth, which it's never quite held on to.
But it just can't do both at the same time. The
author Stacey Floyd Thomas calls this earthly
powerful church the church of the majority. She
argues that for centuries this church of the
majority has been characterized by a doctrine
and belief that empowers the dominant culture,
the powerful, and that the voices of the marginalized,
those that are on the fringes of power and influence,
however quaint they may be, have never been the
central substance of a description of the church.
about a body that's been commissioned to be a
refuge for the poor and the dispossessed and
the neglected. Historically, the church has been
ruled by this top -down model of thinking, not
only about God, but about itself. This systematic
form of reasoning begins from some position of
authority. Perhaps that position is one of scriptural
authority or tradition. or the rhetorical practice
of reason, and then it deduces some right or
correct interpretation or identity from that
power -filled starting point. The church, formed
by these forms of powerful theology, have often
acted as a reinforcement of a top -down, economical,
political, and social power structure. This power
-filled voice of theology has been used timelessly
to deny justice to all forms of various groups
and to justify their subjugation, to push them
to or keep them at the fringes of power and voice.
However, there was a change that took place through
most of the... century, the human experience
changed rapidly like it had never done before.
Through two world wars and the rise of decolonization,
the human experience with the church was somehow
different. Before this, before the 20th century,
dominant cultures simply just ignored the reality
that people's various images of Jesus Christ
reflected a diversity of historical, and personal
experiences. Over time, this dissonance created
a rise in something called liberation theology.
This new form of theology has not only given
rise to a voice to diverse people groups, as
well as individual theologies. But it's shown
these individual people and these diverse people
groups how they, through their own individual
experience, can find peace with God and spur
forth a movement for greater social justice for
all people. As a result, people wishing to engage
in a struggle for justice on earth and have peace
with God have now been given the opportunity
to find, despite of, and with respect for, their
various cultural distances, a path of commonality
that they can utilize for uniting in the same
struggle. When all forms of various interests
can now unite against oppression in the world
by finding some commonality, some shared sense
of a vision of God's peace for the world, a world
in which justice is evenly distributed, These
groups can then reform and define a different
type of community. This reimagining of community
allows people to share a sense of struggle as
their own, not only as individuals, but within
the collective. It also creates a sense that's
vital towards organizing the power of people
to fight the power of oppression. In the world
we live, one of rapid decentralized concepts
of identity and heightened senses of individualism,
how is the church to respond? If theological
leadership within and without the capital C church
is only effective as a result of some sense of
top -down authority which has been granted to
them by the believer, how are we in the church
to respond? Can the church of the 21st century
retain its sense of moral and spiritual authority
without acknowledging and incorporating the individual
experience of the divine? That's the question.
Given this rise, of individualized theology,
the truth is there's no one way to conceptualize
rightly living with God and with each other.
As a result for theological leadership to retain
its sense of authority, those that are engaged
in leading the church spiritually must be able
to respond to the cultural and the spiritual
questions as well as the cultural and spiritual
needs in a rapidly changing world. With this
rise of liberation theology, the truth is the
church can no longer ignore the fact that the
particular believer's theology is affected by
their individual sense of social and ethnic markers
that compose their identity. The truth is, The
way that people experience the world, either
from a position of the dominant or from the fringe
of the marginalized, color the way that we perceive
our relationship with God and our relationship
with others. To put it bluntly, the theology
of the colonizer is just no longer, and if truth
be told, never has been palatable. by anyone
other than the colonizer. As a result, those
that don't conform to a systematic, dominant
view of the church of the majority, well, they've
been leaving the church in droves. They may not
be abandoning God, but they're finding something
else to do with their time on Sunday mornings
and Wednesday evenings. Those that are engaged
in theological leadership must acknowledge that
they must change or they'll face a crisis of
authority. Greater attention must be directed
towards the contemplation of individualized theology
and their impact on the wider faith community.
This reality compels Theological leadership as
well as academic scholarship place a greater
weight to the blossoming study of practical theology,
a greater dialogue from the field of liberation
theologies, and a greater emphasis on social
justice agency and its impact on theological
reflection. In simpler terms, what I mean to
say is that we must reimagine the church as a
collective that forms its identity on how we
react as a result of the life, the death, and
the resurrection of Jesus, and not on a systematic
set of beliefs. Christianity can simply just
no longer be characterized by a flowchart of
if -then propositions of dogma. The reality is
there's only one proposition to be considered.
If the earthly ministry of Jesus taught us a
way in which we can, at the same time, enter
into right relationship with God and each other,
then what do we do as a result? That's it. This
singular supposition allows the individual to
take into account their own personal human experience
in relationship with God and act accordingly.
This is the foundation of practical theology.
But as we know, it's not as simple as that. While
this concept of practical theology informs the
type of spiritual belief, that is reflected in
the individual lives of people, spiritual authority
is also expressed by individual authority. And
spiritual authority underpins the authority of
the church. As if the question about what we
think about God and how do we live in response
isn't a tough enough question, spiritual authority
calls the individual. to decide for themselves
how they trust someone or some church to teach
them about how and what to think about God. As
the theological author Sondra Wheeler relates,
those in theological leadership are therefore
invested with a certain symbolic and real power
that's grounded in transcendent claims and ultimate
commitments. These expressions of power depend
upon this relationship of lent and received authority
that run along an axis that includes points of
contact, both of formalized through denominations
or informalized through relationships, sense
of spiritual authority. As difficult as that
definition is for me to explain, it's sometimes
even more difficult to live out because it's
so incredibly individualized. So what's the church
to do? To continue to express a sense of moral
and spiritual authority, the capital C church,
the church, and all of its leadership must commit
to a reformation. of the identity of the faith
community. And when I say reformation, I mean
to say that the church must foster a way in which
the pieces of the faith community reform in a
way that social power is more evenly distributed.
And when I say community, to be faithful to the
gospel message, I don't mean a particular congregation
or denomination. Largely, I use the word community
here to describe any form of social collective
that we as Christians might imagine. A local
community to a political grouping, to ethnic
or cultural collectives. This concept of theology
is not just thinking about God, but what we as
believers are doing in that collective as a result
of divine reality. The ways in which believers
act to better the world is known as social justice.
And the reformation of community is necessary
for that social justice to occur. And it's difficult
due to the entrenchment of institutionalized
forms of bias and privilege. Denial of equal
opportunity. And while it's the desired goal,
it's got to be recognized by we Christians that
this is not an easy fight. Because of this entrenchment,
it's also the most difficult for we Christians
to achieve. The Reverend Dr. William Barber relates
in his work, The Third Reconstruction, that peace
with God means conflict with the world. Barber
is the leader of the Poor People's Campaign.
His work seems to say that Christ's instruction
in the Great Commandment is for people to engage
in the love of their neighbor in a way that reflects
their love of God. And if Barber's suggestion
is correct, and it is, then a life that honors
a relationship with the divine is one that honors
the life of humankind. Isn't that what church
is supposed to be? Carter Haywood reflects on
this theological belief by saying that the identification
with Christ as a believer is to notice the suffering
of those we know and those we don't know. So,
where do we go from here? Back to our original
question. Christians because of what we believe?
Or are we Christians because of the way we behave?
Can the church continue its attempts to subvert
individual identities and their understanding
of the divine and somehow survive? Can we continue
to prop up the church of the majority and retain
spiritual and moral authority with individual
believers? From the entrance of Eve onto the
pages of Hebrew scripture, the divine message,
has included a desire. Humankind was not to experience
creation in isolation. Rather, the divine plan
is that men and women, each created uniquely
in the image of God, were to live together in
community. This sense of community is carried
with it throughout the ages, a sense of belonging
and a sense of protection. However, with the
systematic structure of individuals institutionally
into groupings, also comes with it the condition
of oppression, subjugation, one dominant group
over a dominant other. As a result of this unequal
distribution of power and of resources, which
has become even more systematic and institutionalized
over time, stain of social injustice has plagued
humankind from its existence. If we as a church
are to survive, we must become a church identified
by how we behave. Well, there you have it, friends.
I hope that this episode was as illuminating
for you to listen to as it was for me to prepare.
Listen, hey, before we go, if you like what we're
doing here at the semi -seminary, and if you'd
take a moment to rate and review the podcast,
it certainly helps us out. Also, if you're new
to the podcast, if you would take the time to
subscribe, however you're listening, it'll let
you know when new episodes are coming up. Later
in the week, we'll be continuing our Bible study
series. We're calling the Bible for Grownups.
We're now moving on to the book of Genesis. This
week, it'll be part two of the book of Genesis.
I hope that you'll join us. And until then, friends,
be blessed and be a blessing.