 |
| Robert Schreiter accessed from revpatrickcomerford.blogspot.co.uk |
A classic but controversial example of a local theology might be the
Enlightenment inspired ‘purging’ of supernatural elements from the Christian
worldview. Rather than this being a case of an objective theology correcting
the limited perspective of previous generations – it might actually have been
(as Bosch suggests)
[Western theologians not
realizing] that their own interpretations were as parochial and as conditioned
by their context as those they were criticizing.
A second example of a localized theology masquerading as a universal
theology is the worldwide exportation of American fundamentalism. Historically little effort was expended
in contextualizing that theology for non-American and non-Western
audiences. This is especially the
case with Latin America where some of the huge strengths of that culture have
been lost to Protestant churches because of the imposition of rigid North
American Fundamentalist Christian culture. Indeed, one might argue that
Pentecostalism has progressed rapidly in South American culture because, in
contrast to their Fundamentalist brethren, many aspects of Pentecostal worship
and life have an indigenous appeal. It has become an effective local theology.
The nature of local
theologies
Local theologies are not simply waiting to be created. They may already be in existence as failed expressions of contextualized
theologies. Schreiter highlights
two types in particular. First, he
suggests that some local theologies are essentially syncretistic.
Syncretism, according to Schreiter, is the ‘mixing of elements of two
religious systems where at least one, if not both, of the systems loses basic
structure and identity.’ One might
define it less academically as the mixing of Christian beliefs with another
belief system in such a way that the integrity of the Christian faith is lost. Examples of syncretism include the
fusion of elements of witchcraft and folk Catholicism in Latin America.
Schreiter is less than sanguine with the popular response given to
syncretism by Christian missionary bodies. This is ‘to take a rigid line on the question of any
cultural accommodation whatsoever.’
Schreiter’s criticism is that while such an approach appears to root out the problem, the reality is that it is creates
another problem and another failed local theology. What may happen when there is a hard line taken against
syncretism is the creation of a dual
religious system. This is where individuals have ostensibly accepted the
new religious outlook but at the same time surreptitiously maintained the old
system intact. A tragic example of
this reality is Rwanda where individuals attended church but also maintained
their links with witchdoctors and thus remained prey to some of the darker
elements of the culture out of which they had been converted.
A third example of a local theology at work is the religious outlook
which characterized much of early American Christianity. Many saw the nation as
a promised land, a godly commonwealth which would be a light to the nations.
Thus the concept of manifest destiny,
so crucial for our understanding of American culture, was the fruit of the
local theology first developed by the New England Puritans.
Can you think of any other examples of local theology which have had a
profound impact on culture? Take a moment to reflect.
What have we learnt so far?
Schreiter’s basic argument is that all theologies are local theologies
and that there is no supra-cultural theology waiting to be discovered or
already in existence. He also
claims that ‘local theologies’ are already in place and that some are marred by
either syncretism or a dual religious system. However, this is not a dissuasive against local theologies
but a spur to develop good local theologies by means of appropriate
inculturation of the gospel.
What are the ingredients of
a good local theology?
 |
| Accessed from www.spiderpic.com |
A question addressed at the outset of Schreiter’s book is, ‘What are
the roots of an appropriate local theology?’ He suggests that there are three in all and that these need
to interact with each other in order to develop a healthy local theology. The three roots are gospel, church and
culture. (Image of roots)
Gospel
Schreiter defines ‘Gospel’ as the Good News of Jesus Christ and the
salvation that God has wrought through him. It includes the proclamation of the Scriptures, the presence
of God in the community guiding and directing them, and their own sharing of
the gospel. If these foundational
elements are lacking it is unlikely that a sound local theology is going to
emerge.
Schreiter is at pains to remind his readers that the gospel does not
fall from the sky. Faith is always
a fides ex auditu, a faith which we
have heard from others. Thus the
gospel is already present with the church that sends the missionary
congregation and although that faith needs contextualized for the culture, it
already has specific content. A theology which broke with orthodox faith and
the Christian tradition would not, in Schreiter’s terms, be a legitimate local
theology.
Church
All mission needs to be rooted in the unity and catholicity of the
church. Thus the missionary
church, for its own safety and security, must be firmly attached to the wider
church and exercise its ministry in communion with that wider church. Schreiter
articulates his perspective in the following words:
Thus there is no local
theology without the larger church, that concrete community of Christians,
united through word and sacrament in the one Lord. The gospel without church
does not come to its full realization; the church without the gospel is a dead
letter. Without church there is no integral incarnation of the gospel.
Culture
The final element in the forming of a local theology is culture.
Schreiter provides an interesting summation of what constitutes culture.
[Culture] represents a way
of life for a given time and place, replete with values, symbols, and meanings,
reaching out with hopes and dreams, often struggling for a better world.
This is an almost poetic definition of culture but we can cull from
it the following important
insights: firstly, culture is never static, it is always changing (this is what
he means by ‘a way of life for a given time’); secondly, culture has core values by which people
live – an example from the Muslim context would be the huge stress placed on
the need for community); thirdly, culture also embodies hopes and fears. An effective local theology needs to
take the community’s aspirations and anxieties with the utmost seriousness.
Constructing a local
theology
How does one go about constructing a local theology? The most important
tool that Schreiter and other missiologists have identified is the capacity to
listen to the culture. This is an
idea which emerges not only in Constructing
Local Theologies but also Mission-shaped
Church, the crucial Anglican document on mission. In terms that echo Schreiter, Mission-shaped Church recommends
the process of double listening: listening to the culture where a new
expression of church might take place but also listening to the inherited
tradition of the gospel and the church.
The Report expresses this idea in the following words:
For church planting, listening
to both contemporary culture and to church tradition is vital. The planters –
here understood in the simple generic sense of those involved in the starting
and sustaining of further and fresh communities of faith – carry with them an
existing understanding of the faith and of church. They do not come with empty
hands, but the next task is to have open ears. Attention to the mission
context, or listening to the world, comes
before discerning how the inherited Christian tradition works within it.
Mission precedes the shape of the church that will be the result, when the seed
of the gospel roots in the mission culture. Listening to the context of the
world shapes what emerges. Then the second aspect of double listening validates
it, through connection with the faith uniquely revealed in the Scriptures.
Schreiter highlights the following questions for any listening process
which the church might engage in:
What are the values of the culture you want to reach?
What are the sources of its identity?
What are the ills that consistently befall the culture?
What remedies are proposed for these ills?
What are the modes of behaviour and codes of conduct?
What are the cultural ideals?
What is the quality of community life?
What are the sources of power?
This kind of investigation enables the church leader to understand to
some degree what is actually going on in the culture. But these are not the
only set of questions which need to be asked. Another set of questions which Schreiter highlights are to
do with how any community which has been analysed in this fashion becomes
fertile ground for a local theology.
For example:
How can the Church help enhance the quality of community life in the
culture to which it seeks to minister?
What part might the church play in addressing community ills?
How can the church exemplify some of the best of the culture’s ideals?
An example of an effective
local theology
 |
| Willow Creek Community Church accessed from refdag.nl |
While the founders of Willow Creek would not have employed the term
‘local theology’, the whole missional experiment taking place there was an
example of how to develop a local theology for an area with a particular
demographic.
How was this theology
developed?
The short answer is that drawing on the inherited theological
tradition, particularly emphases found in Luke’s Gospel, the original leaders of Willow Creek
were committed to reaching a grouping who had no relationship whatsoever to the
church. To personalize their
ministry goal they gave a name to the group of people they were seeking to
reach. They called them ‘Unchurched Harry and Mary.’ These were individuals from the Baby Boomer Generation who
were well educated, wealthy (they happened to live in the upper middle class
Chicago suburban area of South Barrington) and had no current connection to the
church. A decade or two ago
this constituency might have been referred to as Yuppies.
From its inception, Willow Creek sought to understand this demographic
– how they felt, how they would respond to certain initiatives, what mattered
to them most etc – and the basic rule of thumb for all future church activities
was, ‘Does it pass the Harry test?’
Could Harry live this? Would Harry benefit from this? If a church
initiative did not pass that test, then it was a non-runner. This prioritizing of Harry and Mary
went to the extent of the main Sunday morning service being restructured so
that it was entirely appropriate for unchurched people. The ‘believers’ service
with Holy Communion was celebrated on a Wednesday night.
This radical approach to mission was based on a cultural analysis which
indicated that the culture was becoming so endemically unchurched that
something drastic needed to be done. One of the results of this emphasis on the
unchurched was the conviction that Sunday mornings should not be a worship
service but literally a performance in which no participation was expected or
required.
Take a moment to reflect on this initiative. Is it too much a distancing from what the Christian
tradition would say Sundays are about? Another facet of the Willow Creek
approach, and one that was based on familiarity with the culture, was the use
of five minute drama segments to introduce the sermon. This particular approach
is very attractive for most western contexts and is one aspect of Willow that
has never been seriously criticized.
In true American style, Willow Creek’s programmes also strongly appeal
to the emotions – I would say a quintessentially American emphasis – and much
that works in that culture in terms of sermonic material and the use of
testimony would seem somewhat superficial or even false to an Irish or British
audience.
On balance, one would have
to acknowledge that there are significant difficulties in the Willow Creek
approach and few would call it a flawless local theology. One might reasonably note that it is so
geared to the meeting of human needs and self-fulfilment that the glory of God
and the subordination of our desires for the sake of Christ are in danger of
getting lost in some instances.
One might also say that it puts pragmatism above all other motivations
and turns the faith into a business of sorts. But even given these real difficulties, those in leadership
roles do model out passion, conviction, the utilization of skills for the
Kingdom and, of course, that all-out search for the unchurched. Over the years lives have been changed
and there is a significant testimony to the reality of God in a geographical
location that had no previous Christian witness. Moreover Willow Creek have
built substantial links to other denominations and actively sought to meet the
needs of the urban poor. So there
is much to appreciate but one must also be aware that few churches could in any
way emulate what Willow Creek have done.
Conclusion
At the beginning of the post I noted that we would begin thinking about
the Irish context and how one would construct a local theology there. I have two
questions and one or two exercises that I hope will set your minds thinking in
that direction.
1. If you were an
incumbent in a new parish how would you go about gaining knowledge of the
culture of the area? [Who would
you visit? Where, geographically in the parish, would you go? What would you
wear?]
A Northern missiologist gave a very simple recipe for becoming
inculturated. ‘Shopping and talking and
embedding oneself in the community as much as possible as an ordinary person.’
2. Think of an Irish
context that you are familiar with and construct a brief paragraph outlining
what you believe are the central concerns of that community and what is at the
core of how they see life?
The final exercise concerns translating core ideas of the theological
tradition into the language and idiom of the people without recourse to
biblical phraseology. I have
decided to select one of the Thirty Nine Articles and ask you to translate it
into the idiom of inner city Dublin or Belfast.
Albeit that Good Works, which
are the fruits of Faith, and follow after Justification, cannot put away our
sins, and endure the severity of God’s judgment; yet they are pleasing and
acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively
Faith; insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be evidently known as a tree
discerned by the fruit.
No comments:
Post a Comment