On truth and knowing: Who speaks for man?
|
Gustavo Martin lives in Madrid, Spain. He got in touch because he attends Mountain View Church, which was started by Christian Associates. This essay was written originally for his quarterly newsletter Tertullian’s Table. I was keen to post it on OST partly because it offers a healthy perspective on the emerging church but also because it sets the debate within the broader framework of a Catholic-Evangelical dialogue. Andrew Gustavo Martin Madrid September 14 2008, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross I have for some time been in the habit of encouraging Evangelicals and Catholics to explore the best that each has to offer to the larger church. Catholics often find much of modern evangelical theology and biblical studies both challenging and refreshing. Conversely, to many contemporary evangelicals who first explore Veritatis Splendor, Deus Charitas Est, or Fides et Ratio, the ground feels strangely firm beneath their feet. I want to take time, once more, to engage in this exercise in Christian ecumenism, by taking a look at a topic of great importance to all XXI century Christians alike: The relationship of interdependence between faith and reason. This topic is particularly interesting in light of the prevailing canon of postmodernism which denies the very possibility of verifiable knowledge and truth, and the various approaches to engaging with postmodernism made by Catholics and evangelicals. Ten years ago today, Pope John Paul II published his encyclical letter Fides et Ratio, Faith and Reason. Like a meteor landing in the middle of the ocean, its ripples are still being felt along the shores, and its impact and relevance sensed by Christians and non-Christians alike. Fides et Ratio is several things, but, perhaps most surprisingly, it’s a clarion call from the Bishop of Rome to philosophers everywhere to break free of their self imposed limitations and take up again with renewed energy and enthusiasm their high calling to philosophize. Michael Peters of the University of Illinois does well to warn his fellow academics: “[Fides et Ratio] ought not to be dismissed by philosophers too quickly or in summary fashion. The text is even handed…it is historically well informed and built on a genuine concern for humanity [my emphasis].”1 I would like to begin by selectively summarizing some of the key ideas in this document, ideas which I will later relate to topics such as the church´s witness in and to a post-modern culture, and to certain forms of the emergent church movement being promoted today by certain “post evangelicals.” My intention is to weave my selection of strands from the papal document into a brief but cogent lectionary of biblical epistemology, capable of providing Evangelicals much needed ammunition for their engagement with postmodernism, both outside and, especially, within the church. Rather than a detailed summary of the encyclical, therefore, I will highlight the points most relevant to the discussion that will follow. That said, the details selected for discussion should provide a fair and representative sampling of the papal document.
|
Re: On truth and knowing: Who speaks for man?
To be able to bring some of the best of contemporary Catholic and Evangelical scholarship together, and use both to critique postmodernism within emergent Christian thinking, is a wonderfully unusual position to be in, and a privilege to observe and digest. It blows away some of the prejudices and caricatures held by Catholics and Evangelicals alike towards each other.
While I agree with much that is said about McLaren, and the unseen dangers which part of the postmodern church is creating for the next generation of that part of the church, through its rejection of the wider church’s theological orthodoxy and tradition (Catholic and Evangelical), I wonder whether it is totally appropriate to cite Paul’s language of striving in Philippians as valid for today’s church in relation to the culture of the postmodern world. The relationship of the church towards postmodernism seems to me to be a far more complex affair, requiring more subtle adjustments.
The ‘critique from within’, to which N.T.Wright frequently refers in describing the message of the prophets towards Judaism, and ultimately the message of Jesus, seems to me to be more appropriate for the western church today in relation to culture, than outright battle or conflict (however much conflict may have been the experience of Jesus or the prophets!). The struggle suggested in Philippians seems to me to be more a struggle in the face of frequent outright hostility - from Judaism and Rome - and a struggle not to compromise in view of the overt claims of the Emperor and the ‘sweeteners’ which came with the privileges of Roman life and culture.
Once we have dealt with some fairly obvious points of conflict between some aspects of the postmodern mindset and the biblical world view (especially to do with truth and knowing), it seems to me that there is much more to be affirmed in postmodernism than opposed. Some of this is sketched out in Section III - Engaging with postmodernism; but I felt that the overall tone was of an enemy to be opposed rather than a culture offering many opportunities for the expression of a biblical faith which was more, not less, rooted in its historic origins and practice.
Nevertheless, I applaud gustavo for this contribution (copied from a contribution to another forum?), and particularly his boldness in affirming Catholic and Evangelical perspectives on a site which, on the whole, adopts a postmodern scepticism towards both. From my perspective, the contribution is an encouragement to take more seriously the broader ability of Catholic theology to view and bring into play the essential role of philosophy which underpins serious theological reflection, and to see the huge potential for trust and collaboration between Evangelicals and Catholics.
I always enjoy and appreciate people who look over the fence, and ask why we need fences between different traditions, and whether we should dismantle them.