How My Theology Has Changed, Thank God

 

Part XI: Biblical, Critical Methods

 

 

Do you get to believe what you want to believe? Yes, in a way. No one can tell you what you have to believe. As long as you keep it to yourself, yes, I suppose you could say, you get to believe whatever you want to believe. As long as you keep silent. 

 

However, once you open your mouth, or pick up a pen or hit the “send” button, that freedom no longer applies. You have now entered the public sphere which raises immediately the issue of ethics: what is right and what is wrong, which is, in turn, based on what is true or not true. After all, we certainly do not want to mislead someone else because our beliefs are based on falsehoods. 

 

Now a lot of people, including many of our present leaders, could care less about this issue. But if you consider yourself to be a spiritual or religious person, you no longer have a choice. Spiritual persons always take responsibility for their actions, because spiritual persons are attempting to reach beyond simple selfishness to an inclusive view of the world that includes the will of God and the safety and affirmation of all people and all creation. Yes, spiritual people do care about the birds of the air and the lilies of the field. They are all a part of our spiritual quest to live, as American poet Mary Oliver put it, the “one wild and precious life” into which God calls us. 

 

However, this quest runs head-first and head-long into the fact that from the moment of birth we are picking up all kinds of ideas and beliefs, many of which, if we are reflective, are neither true nor right. As religious people we may “believe” that whatever we believe must be true, or, we think, we wouldn’t believe it. I’m sorry to rain on your parade. Such “cozy religion” may sound wonderful, but it does not exist. Millions of people have gone to their graves confidently believing many things that are not true or healthy, and many of those things are destructive to others and to creation.

 

Because of this dynamic, in every parish I served (all ten of them) I stressed and offered what I term “serious Bible study.” I distinguish this kind of study from what I term “devotional” use of the Bible, whereby one reads for inspiration and hopefully direction and insight. However, that latter part often does not occur unless we move to this serious Bible study. 

 

Progressive Christians (including ELCA Lutherans, United Methodist, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ, and many others) do not believe that God “dictated” the Bible to scribes in such a way that whatever the Bible says can be taken literally as fact, as fundamentalists maintain.  Actually, that understanding is viewed as a heresy, as explained by German theologian Paul Tillich in what he coined the “Protestant Principle.”

 

Tillich begins with the dialectical nature of reality, comparing the unconditional to the conditional, the divine to the human, the infinite to the finite, the immortal to the mortal, faith to reason. Now, in traditional theology there is a strong emphasis on working to make sure that one does not profane the divine. Take the Ten Commandments for example. God’s name is holy, and we should not take it in vain. The sabbath day is holy, and we should not neglect nor misuse it. God’s truth is universal and absolute, and it should not be treated as if it were earthly and temporal and changeable.

     

What Tillich states in the Protestant Principle is that just as one should not profane the holy, one should also not elevate that which is finite and cultural to the realm of the sacred. This goes all the way back to the Protestant Reformation and theologians like Martin Luther, who rebelled against certain teachings of the popes of the time that they felt were not God’s eternal will. The one that bothered Luther the most was the admonition to church members to pay money for indulgences, which were pieces of paper from the church that said your sins were forgiven. What bothered him further was that the money from these indulgences was being used to build St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

 

Take the role of women. What if the treatment of women in the Bible is not God’s will, but is a reflection of the culture of the time, and it would be a mistake to elevate that view to be a part of God’s absolute truth?

 

How about slavery? The Bible clearly accepts that practice as a part of reality. Does that mean that God’s will for the world is that some people should be able to own other people? Or is slavery part of a misguided human culture that we should resist at all costs, including in the name of God? 

 

In order to develop a theology and spirituality  that is based on truth we begin with an understanding that the Bible cannot always be taken literally in the search for those truths.  We have to move into the area of what we call “hermeneutics” in theology, which is the process of “interpreting” the meaning of texts for today. 

 

Now, in an ideal world, when folks gather for the kind of serious Bible study I am talking about they would “wipe clean” the slate of their beliefs, and start building those beliefs from the ground up, based on the truths we find in Scripture. However, the modern world has taught us that none of us is as objective as we think we are because we carry all kinds of unconscious or pre-conscious ideas that do not shake out easily. 

 

So, in our search for truth, the first thing we need to try to do is to wipe the slate as clean as possible, while accepting that certain beliefs will always be coming to mind even though we try to put them on the back burner for now.  We call this the attempt to “suspend our present beliefs” as we search for deeper truths. 

 

This brings me to another way in which my theology has changed, beginning in college. At Concordia College in Moorhead, MN, all students had to take a required course  on how to interpret Scripture, in which we were taught Biblical critical methods, which are “scholarly, analytical tools—primarily historical and literary—used to investigate the origins, composition, and meaning of biblical texts, aiming to understand what authors intended rather than just subjective interpretation.” [Wikipedia] I took it the first fall of college. At the time, I had no idea how important what I was learning would be. But the skills learned and later honed were used every day both in parish ministry and my own personal view of life. This process of interpreting the scriptures, called Exegesis, would be central to every sermon I preached, every class I taught, every retreat I led, and the thousands of hours spent in clergy Bible study groups and in classes of parishioners as we studied the Scriptures together. 

 

So, what are these methods and what is their purpose? The first is Textual Criticism--based on having studied both Greek and Hebrew (the languages in which the Bible was written)--in which we try to determine what the text said in its original context. There are many events in the Bible which are written about by differing authors (especially in the Gospels) that have what we call “variants” in which the same story is told differently. The first task, then, is to try to determine as best we can the original text. 

 

Next comes Source Criticism. What are the sources the author used to write his text. For example, scholars believe Mark was the first Gospel written, and Luke and Matthew both had access to it in their Gospels. However, Luke and Matthew also each have their own material as well as a source called Q which contains many of the “sayings” of Jesus. 

 

Then there is Form Criticism which attempts to identify the genre of the text. Is it poetry, a parable, a prayer, prose, a song etc. Each of these types of literature are interpreted differently. 

 

One of my favorites is Redaction Criticism, which analyzes how the author organized and changed earlier material to get their message across. For example, scholars believe Matthew wrote primarily to try to convince the Jews that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, whereas Luke wrote to convince Gentiles that they, too, had a place in the Jesus Movement. 

 

These are just some of the tools of Biblical criticism, but the ones described point to the fact that you do not become an effective theologian or Biblical interpreter by taking one course or joining a church or by reading one of the thousands of theological books that contain shoddy Biblical interpretation and thereby bad theology.

The spiritual journey never ends. This creation is ever living and changing and those of us who believe in a living God will spend our entire lives in dialogue with this God and other spiritual people as we attempt to discern what God is doing now and what God is calling us to do next. This spiritual journey is demeaned when we try to take shortcuts to truth or when we assume the profound spiritual leaders of our time do not know what they are talking about. However, if we are willing to listen and learn, the kingdom of God opens before us. Simply pick up a book by Merton, Nouwen, Ghandi, Tutu, Pope Francis or Pope Leo, or, our new ELCA Presiding Bishop, Yehiel Curry,   who wrote in his Easter Message:

The journey to the empty tomb didn’t begin on the cross of Good Friday but in a manger decades earlier. Jesus was born with a purpose: to reveal God’s love, demonstrate grace, and call us into a life of justice, mercy and compassion. It was a long journey, a ministry that spread across the hills of Judea, well beyond his birthplace in Bethlehem and his home in Nazareth. And along the way, he showed us what it means to be children of God.