Now, I try not to beat this topic to death but I've had a specific request... and I must indulge my reading public! The request was to present some of the material of a seminar I sat in on last week. The seminar was titled "Worldviews in Tandem, Tension, and Conflict." It was exploring how this transition from Modernity to Post Modernity is showing itself within the Evangelical Churches of North America. The beauty of this seminar was that it was presented by a father and son. Both are knowledgable theologians; the father has been a pastor for several decades while the son is working on his doctorate at Canadian Baptist Seminary.
The father and his son; the pastor and the student; the modern and the post modern.
I can hardly begin to scratch the surface of what they got into so I'll just give you the outline and, should you choose to direct the comments, we can go from there.
Oh, and if you don't care then just skip down to the picture of Mother Teresa.
**Please keep in mind that these are hugely, broad generalizations that can only be understood to represent the very basic ideas of each worldview within an evangelical Christian context.**
Where the Modern and Post Modern Worldview are in:
Tandem: (agree)
1. The Centrality of Christ
2. The Reality of Relationship with God
3. The Importance of the Church
Tension: (may not totally agree but don't completely disagree either)
1. Perspectives on God
a. Post Modern emphasis on God's "Immanence" (closeness)
b. Modern emphasis on God's "Transcendance" (greatness, holiness, implied distance)
2. Perspective on Mission
a. Post Modern emphasis on Social Justice
b. Modern emphasis on Evangelism
Conflict: (areas where PM and M worlviews are in direct contradiction)
1. View of History
a. Post Modernity views us as being 'interdependant' with history. We are shaped by history... we do not live in a vacuum. This view also emphasises a return to a 'historical' view of Christianity.
b. Modernity is the era of the 'self made man.' Man is independant of history. History does not shape us, we shape the future.
2. View of Culture
a. Post Modern Evangelicalism views 'church culture' as being fabricated (see below). It is a false reality. Culture is something to be redeemed. Not only that, we can learn from culture. All truth is God's truth regardless it's cultural source.
b. Modern Evangelicalism views the world as the enemy. Thus the church focuses on protecting / isolating itself from the world more than interacting with it. Create a 'Christian Culture' so that we are not ruined by the world's culture.
3. Views of Truth ... THE BIG ONE
a. Post Modernity views truth as being a relationship to be engaged with. Truth is too big to be pinned down by propositional statements (see below). Truth is to be experienced.
b. Modernity views truth as being best described through propositional statements. Mental acceptance of truth statements are emphasised over lifestyle. Hence it's emphasis on flawless doctrine.
While there are about a billion things that could be discussed here I just want to highlight one
example that they used. The modern christian worldview focused more on Right Belief than on Right Action. The post modern view is reversed; it is more important to act like a christian than to have all of your theological ducks in a row.The perfect way to see this divergence is this: The modern evangelical would look at someone like Mother Teresa and question if she was actually a christian. They might say, "Sure she acted like she loved God and loved those around her... but she was a Catholic." Thus, disagreements with her theology overpower her obvious Christian lifestyle.
The post modern evangelical would say, "Sure I may not agree with all of her theological views, but come on! It's so obvious by her lifestyle that everything she did was driven by her love for God and her fellow mankind. Who cares if we don't agree on every little thing? The main thing is that she believed that Jesus was God's Messiah."
So, what do you think?
Talk to me.
7 comments:
I think I would have liked to be at that conference. This issue is a source of frustration for many people in ministry, young and old. Especially when the modern and post-modern mix and have to work side by side. I am often frustrated by the "fake" Christian culture that is built around me. But others have worked so hard to build it. It's even in our purpose statement. To Reach up, Reach in, Reach out. I see where this comes from (and I don't totally dis-agree with it) but shouldn't we be "going out" instead of keeping our feet in the church culture and reaching out to snag people on there way by? But the modern people see the church as the safe house from the world. They are even hesitant to invite un-believers in because it might mess up our culture.
As for Mother Teresa, it seems to me that she was a post-modern in a modern world. Saved or not, she is respected by Christians and non-Christians alike and is an incredible witness for God. How many theologians who have a lot of theological knowledge are in the same position?
Tim S.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I sat in... uninvited... in this conference talk too. It really was incredible to see the difference so clearly laid out. One thing I did notice is that with both extremes there are right and wrong points. So it's not that one is correct and the other incorrect, but that there is positive and negative to both views. Therefore, the only way we can follow God together in love and reverence of him and each other is to understand each others' perspectives, accept each other as being equally loved by God, and work together to build up the church. If we just sit on one side or the other and blame each other, we are just slowing down the gospel. But if we join our ideas together, no matter how diverse, and work together as the body of Christ, what great things HE could accomplish through us. I like this topic a lot because it has such great potential. If it stopped being a generational argument and started to be an acknowledged fact of generational change, what an interesting discussion and amazing church we could have. I hope that made sense.
I'm a little concerned with both spectrums. I think with the areas that the two mostly agree on the real truth is found in both- spiritual AND social justice; Transcendance AND imminence- the truth is found in both.
As for the areas of conflict- I likely side mostly on the side of post-modern thinking when it comes to history and culture-- but you are right- Truth is "THE BIG ONE". I've just been reading that some believe that a person can be a Muslim who follows Jesus. In other words, belong to the Muslim religion and be a Christian as well. Or a Hindu Christian- including worshipping Jesus in the context of Hindu ceremonies i.e have a water cleansing instead of Baptism... and now Wheaton is inviting a "pro-gay evangelical" to speak to their students to support gay marriage as a "justice issue". And polls show that a large number of younger (mostly post-modern) evangelicals believe that gay marriage is ok... So, to me, truth is a person- Jesus Christ and He is the one who determines what is correct behaviour and belief and what is not- The danger in post-modernism is in placing a higher value on relationships with others than with Jesus and therefore accepting ideas and theology that are incompatible with Jesus. Conversley the danger with modernity is to side with the pharisees as if we have it altogether cognitively and therefore are ok with God except that we miss Him altogether while He is right in front of us.
As for someone like Mother teresa, I again think that the judgements of both sides are correct and need to be meshed. We need to know if someone has relinquished religion for Jesus-- i.e Repented and trusted-- and the eveidence of that is found in their fruit. Do they live for all intents and purposes to mkae a name for themselves in the world- or to advance the Name and reputation of Jesus?
So typical of someone who was born and raised in the middle of both camps- I kinda agree wit both and kinda disagree with both!
Aaah. If only we could find a balance! You're definitely right. Both perspectives have their strengths and weeknesses. I wish we could blend the two into something fresh without going too far either way.
As a young post-modern evangelical the one thing I get really frustrated by is when people bash the P-M Christian worldview without understanding that they do so from their own modern worldview... it's just a complete lack of understanding that every perspective comes with a 'spin'.
... but of course that's my P-Mism coming out.
OBJECTIVITY IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!
However this would be very hard for a modern thinker to see since they tend to view themselves as being 'self made' rather than being shaped by a worldview.
I think it would be hard for me to say whether Mother Teresa is a Christian or not, just like it would be hard for me to say whether or not the people I work with are or the people I go to church with. I don't know people's hearts, only God does. Someone may claim to be a follower of God and really carry deep resentment and bitterness toward God in his heart, how would I know? Who am I to judge?
I think we too easily say, "You must/must not be a Christian because of..." but how do we really know?
Did I miss something? Why is there all of a sudden this uncertainty about Mother Teresa being a Christian?
This isn't just because of that 'crisis of faith' stuff is it?
And please don't tell me it's because she's Catholic...
The only reason I brought this up is because it was an example used in the seminar to highlight the differing worldviews.
I know it's not up to me... but as far as I'm concerned it's not even a question.
Honestly, evangelicals love to quote Romans 10:9,10 but as soon as they run into someone who doesn't worship the 'right' way or baptise someone the 'right' way or think of Mary the 'right' way they throw it out the window.
Double standard?
Post a Comment