A Short Post on Theological Nuisances
I was at a meeting yesterday in which a colleague of mine had a slip of the tongue. He was saying that people in churches don't want to hear all the theological nuances of particular passages. They just want to know that you love them as a pastor.
The trouble was - first - I disagree with that idea. I think you need both. As another friend said, "Exegesis, study, and the theological nuances are like your underwear. People don't need to see them, but they need to be there."
Second, his wording slipped up and instead of nuance he said "nuisance." People don't want to hear all the "theological nuisances" of a passage. While that isn't what he meant to say, I would have to actually agree with it. Theology can be a nuisance. Reading scripture with an analytic eye can cause problems, especially when you begin to realize that parts of the Bible don't always sit well with other parts. That is certainly a nuisance.
Perhaps, in this polarized, "you're against me if you waver at all in opinions" society, struggling through the nuisance nuances of scripture isn't popular.
But it certainly is needed.
In the United Methodist Church, of which I am a part, there is (on paper anyway) the desire to walk in the middle, recognizing that there are valid points from both sides of the spectrum. We also recognize that those who dwell on the far reaches of that spectrum (liberal and conservative extremists or fundamentalists) do not and perhaps cannot engage in conversation because they are already so convinced they are right (I will talk about that next week). So what we try to do is struggle together with scripture, utilizing Church tradition, examining personal experience, and approaching it rationally to come out on the other end with a methodical and reasoned approach to the nuances of scripture.
We may not do that all too well from time to time, but I believe we have to try.
Of course, if you don't love the people you serve as a pastor, it is very likely that no one will want to hear you out anyway.
-
I would like to add that (for the two of you that read this blog) I have started doing a few upgrades or modifications to the blog. In particular I have added four links. If you take a few moments to look at them, you'll see pretty quickly that at least two of them come from way different points on the spectrum theologically and politically. If anything, they point to parts of larger conversations. For sure both John and Bob's sites will certainly prompt critical thinking!
I plan on adding a few more here and there - I have a few friends who write blogs that I want to draw your attention to as well. They will pop up in the next few weeks.
The trouble was - first - I disagree with that idea. I think you need both. As another friend said, "Exegesis, study, and the theological nuances are like your underwear. People don't need to see them, but they need to be there."
Second, his wording slipped up and instead of nuance he said "nuisance." People don't want to hear all the "theological nuisances" of a passage. While that isn't what he meant to say, I would have to actually agree with it. Theology can be a nuisance. Reading scripture with an analytic eye can cause problems, especially when you begin to realize that parts of the Bible don't always sit well with other parts. That is certainly a nuisance.
Perhaps, in this polarized, "you're against me if you waver at all in opinions" society, struggling through the nuisance nuances of scripture isn't popular.
But it certainly is needed.
In the United Methodist Church, of which I am a part, there is (on paper anyway) the desire to walk in the middle, recognizing that there are valid points from both sides of the spectrum. We also recognize that those who dwell on the far reaches of that spectrum (liberal and conservative extremists or fundamentalists) do not and perhaps cannot engage in conversation because they are already so convinced they are right (I will talk about that next week). So what we try to do is struggle together with scripture, utilizing Church tradition, examining personal experience, and approaching it rationally to come out on the other end with a methodical and reasoned approach to the nuances of scripture.
We may not do that all too well from time to time, but I believe we have to try.
Of course, if you don't love the people you serve as a pastor, it is very likely that no one will want to hear you out anyway.
-
I would like to add that (for the two of you that read this blog) I have started doing a few upgrades or modifications to the blog. In particular I have added four links. If you take a few moments to look at them, you'll see pretty quickly that at least two of them come from way different points on the spectrum theologically and politically. If anything, they point to parts of larger conversations. For sure both John and Bob's sites will certainly prompt critical thinking!
I plan on adding a few more here and there - I have a few friends who write blogs that I want to draw your attention to as well. They will pop up in the next few weeks.
Comments
Post a Comment