"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal
Before I sign off – I really like this piece from Father Greg Jones, who styles himself as an “Anglican centrist.”
I’ve been wondering recently if there’s a future for people who are traditionalist or orthodox on theological matters (Christology, Trinity, etc.) but lean “liberal” on some of the contested hot button issues currently dividing our churches. I hope to write more about this soon.
Link via Haligweorc.
There’d better be a future for us! If all the church has is obscurantist conservativism and constructivist liberalism, then our prospects are dim indeed.
I think there’s a rather large groundswell of such a ‘middle,’ myself. There’s a very large number of people who have migrated to the liturgical communions from evangelicalism who remain creedally orthodoxy, but are quite adamant about rejecting the hardline on many issues of the right.
I have actually found the opposite — in “Christian left” circles, many folks seem to want, for instance, women’s ordination or homosexual inclusion, but they also want to retain, for instance, an inerrantist approach to Scripture. (Not that inerrantism is very orthodox, though…) A good example is Jim Wallis, who excoriates “liberal theologians” in his God’s Politics book along with the GOP.
I think the problem is that purity tests don’t serve community very well, and we often apply those tests to labels rather than the people behind the labels. Figuring out how to be in community with people requires more work than that, because sometimes “theological liberalism” today may, after creative engagement with the tradition, become orthodoxy tomorrow, or it may truly be outside the spectrum of the Christian project. Likewise for theological and political conservatism — sometimes it’s conserving valuable tradition, and sometimes it’s holding onto something that must change for the church to truly live out the Gospel. I think there’s probably a place in the church for all configurations, as long as we work hard to preserve the core teachings of the Gospel.
I find myself becoming increasingly suspicious of labels, especially “liberal” and “conservative” (including their various near-synonyms). In fact, while reading Fr. Jones’ post, it occurred to me that he seems to draw the line between “conservative” and “centrist” very finely and somewhat arbitrarily. It’s all about nuance, I guess.
Anyhow, at the risk of drawing equally arbitrary distinctions, I’ve long thought of myself as theologically orthodox but progressive on social issues. In my mind, the two positions complement one another. On the other hand, I can imagine a champion of Missouri Synod orthodoxy insisting otherwise. Much depends on how we define “orthodoxy”, as well as any other labels we use.
I believe that different understandings of what it means to acknowledge the “authority” of canonical Scripture lies at the heart of much of the turmoil in our churches these days. I’ve also been pondering the controversy between Paul and the party of the Pharisees in the first century. I wonder if there may not be important parallels with our present troubles, especially in the tension that arises by insisting on an uncritical interpretation and application of Scripture while also professing faith in the ongoing work and revelations of the Holy Spirit in our lives.
A Thinking Reed 
Leave a comment