Walking away from GA one of the things that grabbed hold of me is the lack of theological depth in the church today. Many of the debates that should have been from a theological point, were not, there was more debate on a personal emotional level. Along with this is the lack of Scriptural awarness and a difference of how we interpret Scripture. There are many ways Presbyterians have historically interpreted Scripture, but the most prevalent to me at GA, was what do I bring to the text and how does the text say what I want it to say. So where have we gotten lost?
I was reading Michael Jinkins book "Letters to New Pastors" the other day and something he said struck me. The theology of the congregation is only as deep as the hymns it sings. So how has the prevalence of contemporary music (particularly the old 7-11 songs - 7 words sung 11 times) and the changing of the old hymns and in some cases getting rid of them affected congregational theology? Because we have tried to use more inclusive language have we begun to lose the ability to see God as utterly transcendent? Does the phrase "High King of Heaven" point us to a transcendent God?
How do we begin to reclaim our theological heritage? How do we help our congregation rediscover the importance of them each being a theologian and that theology truly does matter? I can't help but wonder if we as a denomination and as the larger catholic church, if we would be in a better place that we are now. How has a lack of theological understanding impacted what we are doing as church (or not doing)? How has our lack of understanding added to the arguements?
The Trinity paper raised a ton of debate that I wasn't sure where it came from. But then I got an email from my sister after an article ran in the local paper. She was totally against the names brought forth as other ways to speak about the triune God. What I feel that she and a bunch of people missed was the fact that every image for the triune God, was to be anchored in the historical formula of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. No one was out to change the baptismal formula or say we could use the historic names. It was instead a time to encourage the church to look beyond one way to name the triune God and to look at Scriptural images that are used and bring those forth.
This has caused me to stop and look at what I feel called to do. I feel strongly about theological education in the church. I wonder if this my deep joy that intersects with a need in the church.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
karen, check this out...joseph brought it in today and of course, hilarody ensued...
http://www.tulsaworld.com/MarletteCartoonsStory.asp?ID=060625_Op_g6_toon
hearts, mj
I saw it. Layman has it on their online page. Nutty!
I'm not sure I agree with the basic premise that a congregation's knowledge of theology and/or scripture is based primarily upon its hymnody.
While I don't doubt that this might be true of some people who are musical learners, it seems an over generalization to apply it to all.
That said, it really does behoove us as pastors to take a careful look at the music we use in worship, the old as well as the new. After all, many older hymns contain theological propositions that we no longer adhere to.
Post a Comment