Mail me comments, suggestions, warnings, flames, whatever
The following note came from the Ecunet system , where I had posted
the copy of the previous pages of the comments of Constance
Received: from pcusa01.ecunet.org by clearwater.iac.net with SMTP
id TAA28380; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 19:53:20 -0500
From: Ecunet mail gateway <network@ecunet.org>X-Mailer: SCO System V Mail (version 3.2)
To: dlature@comcast.net
Subject: THEOLOGY AND THE INTERNET Note 47 by LARRY BOURGEOIS
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 96 19:14:29 EST
Message-ID: <9601091914.aa26006@pcusa01.ecunet.org>
X-UIDL: 821248220.002
Re: #46 from INTERNET on Jan. 05, 1996
Where does one start to address the kind of perspective that "Constance" is
taking on the Matthew Fox issue... I will make "my" perspectival bias known
at the start...
I am an episcopalian (80's), before choosing to become one I was
a card carrying Fuller Seminary graduate (70's), before that a
Wheaton College graduate, before that an assemblies of God Bible
college student, before that a "pagan" coffeehouse patron
of the Northern California variety (circa 60's). All that means
that I care to share is that I have heard the faith pronounced
from the conservative fundamentalist perspective, the pentecostal
perspective, the mainstream evangelical, the "liberal"
or progressive evangelical perspective etc, and finally a more
"orthodox" and "catholic" perspective - Anglican/Episcopalianism.
Lesson I have found in all that:
1) In each of those traditions there are perceived "enemies"
that surround their encampments. When the faithful of one particular
tradition round up their wagon and bread bread together they do
so with those who are inside their wagon round up. In a world
of complexity and diversity such as we are now "stewing"
that makes sense, it provides a limiting that makes a small intimate
culture of faith possible. However, it is hard to get outside
that narrow perspective and truly see into another "encampment."
2)If there is a "way" to see into another's wagon round
up, and I have tried to do so for 25 years as a Christian lay
theologian and religious bookseller... is to make a serious attempt
to understand what they personally perceive their world of "prayer"
"miracles" "spiritual cause and effect" etc,
to inquire about what "father" and "spouse"
and the human images of incarnation mean to them in their personal
daily lives etc. I have found that most Christian people (of any
tradition) can share their faith stories in this way, and it is
reasonable to assume as a starting point that God listens to their
prayers, and is big enough to "work" with their limited
or "heretical theologies..."
3)In my faith life experience I have worked for 20+ years as a
religous bookseller, a "christian bookseller" and a
"bookstore coffeehouse operator" and I have attempted
to understand faith and religion in the marketplace... as people
share it "across formal denominational barriers" etc.
I have come to the conlcusion from those attempts that there appear
to me... to be people of "great faith" (ie they desire,
love and serve God with all their minds, hearts and souls...)
in ALL of the various "traditions" of Christianity.
Likewise, there are also people of "unfaith" "unlove"
and such like that are represented across the boards as well.
What I personally derive from this "life reflection"
is that so long as we encourage one another to grow the love and
faith that we each have (from grace as a gift), along with the
"theology" that we use to refelct on faith experience),
that we will end up each growing in the "knowledge and wisdom
of our Lord..." I don't mean by that to disparage the importance
of theological reflection along with critical examination and
dialogue. I take theology and theologizing quite seriously, but
I don't take it as the ultimate spiritual "weapon" of
"tool." Some comments.
4) The Eastern Christian tradition speaks of "theology"
when it descends from the mind into the "heart" becomes
"spirituality." I think that when the fruits of the
spirit (however they are understood personally) are applied to
theological reflection and dialogue (peoples comments which are
made from the very limited meaning of words...) there can end
up being some fruitful exchange... In other words, each party
is "blessed" by the other persons reflections. Also,
in a spirit of humilty, I think we should each be aware of how
little we each see of the "total truth..." That doesn't
mean that our part of the truth is not to be taken of "ultimate"
importance to us, but perhaps it is not to be used for evaluating
another persons faith experience and life reflection.
5) My personal life experience has permitted me to dialogue with
people who have seemed to be "well-intentioned" and
faithful Christians. For whatever reason these individuals have
taken it upon themselves to lampoon any number of people, be they
represented by the Catholic Church (calling it the great whore,
the beast, etc) or those that are so concerned about the return
of Christ that they lose the good news for confusing the return
of Christ with their own footnotes - literally, the pre-mills
parting company with the a- or post millenial persuasions etc.
That of course continues into the present day discussion regarding
Dale Latures personal theology and spirituality.
6) I personally know Dale Lature, have known him for three years,
and I am part of a Christian Formation class with him (The Servant
Leadership School of the Church of the Savior in Washington, D.C.)
I hold his Christian belief and personal witness in high esteem.
I am proud to know him as a brother in Christ. I have shared my
life faith pilgrimage with him as he has with me. From that I
know he seeks to have a genuine relationship with God and that
he seeks to be honest in all that with his life experience. I
also know that both he and I have been greatly influenced by the
model of the Church of the Saviour in Washington, D.C. Fortunately
20+ years ago we each managed to visit the COS in DC and we were
each "spirituality" moved by the experience. However,
for me personally, I could not "see" the wisdom of what
they were doing because I was attempting to "judge"
it through the limited spiritual perspective I was seeing reality
through at the time. I was a student at a rural pentecostal Bible
college at that time and "their wagon camp" saw the
spiritual life through the "second blessing" and the
Acts chapter 2 bible study series. Because I was so blinded by
that "exclusive" approach I failed to see the "depth"
of what the Church of the Savior was doing. Thanks be to God,
over the past 20+ years, Gordon Cosby, Elizabeth O'Connor and
the many other Christians who were fellowshipping at Church of
the Savior in the 60's 70' 80's just stayed to their conviction
of what was their principle faith task... So that in the 1990's
I could grow to understand and be the beneficiary of their faith
work.
Some examples. All I am really saying is that I have known fundamentalists
theologians who make their life belittling CS Lewis for not being
a "theologian"... All the while CS Lewis never claimed
to be one... and the legitimate theological community never saw
him as one... The underlying cause of that was in my mind not
because of any issues of theology... but rather CS Lewis managed
to speak to the thinking masses because he had some gifts that
went with his theological understanding (he was an excellent writer,
knew how to work with a wide range of literary styles, he had
a good sense of church history, spirituality and philosophy...)
Because of that combination of qualities he has probably influenced
for good more twentienth century lay theologians than any other
writer. However, if you want to pick apart his theology you can
find things to "mangle.."
Another example is Thomas Merton. Thomas Merton is the reigning
example of Christian monasticism being made "publically accessible".
His biography Seven Story Mountain, his spiritual reflections,
his commentary on issues and faith concerns, and his many other
books, poems, letters etc have perhaps influenced my generation
spirituality than any other single Monastic author... He has influenced
the eastern religious traditions as well, and brought many people
of other faith traditions to seriously consider the life of Christ.
He did all those things because he felt that to be his calling.
There was a time in my life when I could not "hear"
what he had to say from a dear friend.... because he was a "catholic"
and every one knew what THAT meant... coupled with the fact that
he was worshipping with Buddhist and with people who meditated
etc... he was "questionable" and not to be listened
to. Fortunate 20+ years after hearing those things I have been
able to take retreats at the Abbey of Gethsemenae and I have been
richly blessed by those brothers in Christ there.
Lastly. Matthew Fox has also made me aware of many things that
I would have missed had I not read several of his books. I will
run out of space here but will leave that to a different message.
Suffice it to say that I don't agree with some of the things Matthew
Fox espouses, but I think I would also say that he has much to
say that the Church at large needs to reckon with... and he has
a unique ability to "package" some of the lesser known
gems within Christianity's rich and diverse history so that many
people who would otherwise not come in contact with those "voices"
have been able to do so.
Constance - I pray that you grow in faith and wisdom and a spirit
of humility as you seek to develop your "personal theological
reflection." Larry Bourgeois
Back to New Media Communications Home Page
Back to Internet Theological Seminary Table of Contents
Back to my "What is a Christian" page