Centrist theology

[paradox3]

Centrist theology has come up on another thread.

The term "centrist" seems to have arisen in political discourse and it is starting to make its way into theological discussion.

What does it mean? Is it identical to being middle of the road?

Is it different in Canada and the US?

 

[Mendalla]

I am not sure the "spectrum" idea is as applicable in theology as in politics. Maybe on a very broad level, but there is a lot of nuance that gets lost looking at it that way. Then again, that is arguably true in politics, too. For all that people on both right and left try to make it a battle of opposites, there's a surprising amount of nuance if you actually look into people's views.

For instance, process theology and Vosper's spiritual atheism (or whatever you want to call it) both fall at the progressive end of any attempt to put theology on a line, but they are distinctly different from one another in many ways. Similarly, Pentecostals and conservative Baptists fall at the "conservative evangelical" end but are, again, distinctly different from one another, no matter how much progressives might try to tar them with the same brush. And there are conservatives (people who want to maintain traditional theology and morality) who are not evangelicals. And, arguably, there are evangelicals who fall on the liberal to progressive end of the spectrum.

And "centrist"? Dear Lord, that is so broad as to be meaningless, isn't it? At least on the political spectrum, you can have someone who has conservative fiscal policies (e.g. maintain free enterprise, minimize government debt) but liberal social policies (e.g. supports social programs to some degree, supports the rights of women, LGBTQ, etc., and so on) that can then be defined as "center" since they clearly fall in between the left and right.

But in theology, where you're already probably dealing with more of a "cloud" or at least two-dimensional graph than a line, centrist is going to be harder to define.

 

[Luce NDs]

I am not sure the "spectrum" idea is as applicable in theology as in politics. Maybe on a very broad level, but there is a lot of nuance that gets lost looking at it that way. Then again, that is arguably true in politics, too. For all that people on both right and left try to make it a battle of opposites, there's a surprising amount of nuance if you actually look into people's views.

For instance, process theology and Vosper's spiritual atheism (or whatever you want to call it) both fall at the progressive end of any attempt to put theology on a line, but they are distinctly different from one another in many ways. Similarly, Pentecostals and conservative Baptists fall at the "conservative evangelical" end but are, again, distinctly different from one another, no matter how much progressives might try to tar them with the same brush. And there are conservatives (people who want to maintain traditional theology and morality) who are not evangelicals. And, arguably, there are evangelicals who fall on the liberal to progressive end of the spectrum.

And "centrist"? Dear Lord, that is so broad as to be meaningless, isn't it? At least on the political spectrum, you can have someone who has conservative fiscal policies (e.g. maintain free enterprise, minimize government debt) but liberal social policies (e.g. supports social programs to some degree, supports the rights of women, LGBTQ, etc., and so on) that can then be defined as "center" since they clearly fall in between the left and right.

But in theology, where you're already probably dealing with more of a "cloud" or at least two-dimensional graph than a line, centrist is going to be harder to define.

Nebulae; theory as broad based? Thus that fuzzy waddling character ...

 

[paradox3]

There are any number of things that exist on a theological spectrum when you think about it.:

High to low Christology.
Literal to symbolic views of all aspects of traditional theology
Historical to mythological understanding of the Bible.
All the places where theology and social justice intersect.

Probably lots more.

 

[Mendalla]

There are any number of things that exist on a theological spectrum when you think about it.:

High to low Christology.
Literal to symbolic views of all aspects of traditional theology
Historical to mythological understanding of the Bible.
All the places where theology and social justice intersect.

Probably lots more.

Yep. It's very much something that you plot on a two or even three-dimensional set of axes and may not really have a "center" so much as a sphere where most of the data points lie. Maybe a normal curve of some form but in three dimensions. The "right" and "left" might be smaller clumps to one side or another but may cover a surprising amount of ground each.

 

[paradox3]

Yes it's much more complex than a simple x:y axis.

We talk about denominations' places on the spectrum too. But we need only look to the United Church to observe a very wide range of worldviews.

It might be accurate to think of the membership of a denomination tending to skew in a certain direction (s).

 

[Mendalla]

It might be accurate to think of the membership of a denomination tending to skew in a certain direction (s).

This. You may also (if you did a proper survey that stratified for the respondents' roles in the church) find that the leadership skews differently from the membership. Having liberal or progressive theology (or a conservative one) being proclaimed by ministers and other leaders does not automatically means that's what you find in the pews, even in a relatively democratic denomination like the UCCan.

 

[paradox3]

The former Observer did at least one readership survey of theological views. I remember reading the survey results with interest but I can't say I recall the details.

It was tricky for them to come up with survey questions which were unambiguous. But the survey did give us a good snapshot view.

Prior to his term as Moderator, Richard Bott did a similar survey of ministry personnel.

 

[paradox3]

Just pondering that the Observer readership would only have been a subset of the total United Church membership at the time.

 

[Mystic]

Paradox3, what puzzles me about your criteria for an ideal church, as I understand you, is your apparent utter indifference to the experiential and mystical aspects of spirituality. If Jesus offered you an intimate personal relationship with Him, would you even be interested?
And have you no interest in life in the Spirit? By this I am referring to Paul's teaching on "walking in the Spirit," "being led by the Spirit," 'praying in the Holy Spirit," "the fruit of the Spirit," and "the gifts of the Spirit." It is the widespread indifference to all these experiential dimensions of Chrisitanity that Billy Graham had in mind when he famously lamented, "Many Christians have just enough spirituality to inoculate them against the real thing."

 

[Mendalla]

is your apparent utter indifference to the experiential and mystical aspects of spirituality

I am not sure she is so much indifferent as, like me, simply has not had experiences that inform her faith in a church. I am quite open to the experiential and mystical aspects of spirituality, but have found outdoors in nature or in a concert hall is where they happen so I tend to associate them with something broader/other than "church". For me, it's about deep connection to nature or humanity. I explored those experiences in my sermons and services when I was a lay leader in UU'ism, but they are the basis of a very personal individual spirituality, not a "church" faith. Hence my long spell where I self-described as a "pantheist" (and I might, on paper, still be one).

 

[paradox3]

@Mystic,
Where have I said anything about my criteria for an ideal church? I have mentioned two local congregations recently and explained my attachment to both of them.

Not sure I have said anything else that even comes close to the question of an ideal church.

 

[Mystic]

@Mystic,
Where have I said anything about my criteria for an ideal church? I have mentioned two local congregations recently and explained my attachment to both of them.

Not sure I have said anything else that even comes close to the question of an ideal church.

What I said is based on your expressed aversions to experiential spirituality and the deafening silence of what you never celebrate. Why did you duck my qauestion? It was a good faith effor to try to understand you and support your spiritual quest. Mendalla provided an excellent example of what I'm after.

 

[paradox3]

What I said is based on your expressed aversions to experiential spirituality and the deafening silence of what you never celebrate. Why did you duck my qauestion? It was a good faith effor to try to understand you and support your spiritual quest. Mendalla provided an excellent example of what I'm after.

No I am not ducking your question but I was a little thrown to see it appear on this thread. How is it relevant to to the topic of centrist theology?

I have talked quite a bit about my faith journey here on WC2.

 

[paradox3]

I am not sure she is so much indifferent as, like me, simply has not had experiences that inform her faith in a church. I am quite open to the experiential and mystical aspects of spirituality, but have found outdoors in nature or in a concert hall is where they happen so I tend to associate them with something broader/other than "church". For me, it's about deep connection to nature or humanity. I explored those experiences in my sermons and services when I was a lay leader in UU'ism, but they are the basis of a very personal individual spirituality, not a "church" faith. Hence my long spell where I self-described as a "pantheist" (and I might, on paper, still be one).

No, I have had experiences in church which have informed my faith. Connections with others. Music. Sermons. Study groups. Shared prayer. Walking the labyrinth etc.

Agreeing with you about nature and humanity.

 

[unsafe]

Interesting read on this --I just posted this from the article ----you can read all yourselves

My Struggle with Centrism #UMC​

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Uncategorized

My Struggle with Centrism #UMC

Since the 2015 Annual Conference season I have been wrestling with some basic questions: Should we take it for granted that the preservation of United Methodism is a foremost value? Is the Holy Spi…

kevinmwatson.com

For Christians, there is no inherent value in being centrist. In fact, centrism is by definition an unstable concept that is fundamentally bound to the prevailing winds of culture. To be in the center, or the middle of extremes, you first have to know what the extremes are. And they are constantly changing. And then you have to move your beliefs and values to the center. This means that one’s beliefs and values are not first informed by Scripture, or the deep riches of the Christian tradition, but by one’s cultural context, whether it is accountable to the gospel or not.

I know I fail to live up to my own ideals. I am still pursuing growth in holiness. But I am convinced that faithfulness should trump centrism every time they come into conflict.

There is simply no way of knowing ahead of time that following Jesus will lead you between two extremes. And Christians should be committed to following Jesus, whether doing so means we receive the respect of the broader culture that comes from being a centrist, or whether we are despised by the culture we live within as radical extremists.

Put differently, I cannot imagine a reading of the Gospels that could convincingly argue that Jesus was a centrist. Centrists, after all, are rarely crucified.

Kevin M. Watson is a professor at Candler School of Theology, Emory University. He teaches, writes, and preaches to empower community, discipleship, and stewardship of our heritage

 

[Mystic]

No I am not ducking your question but I was a little thrown to see it appear on this thread. How is it relevant to to the topic of centrist theology?

Yes, you continue to duck my question, an evasiveness which tells me all I need to know about your self-awareness. My comments get to the heart of the bridge offered by centrist theology for the divide between conservative and progressive theology. Could you at least comment on Billy Graham's insight?

 

[paradox3]

Yes, you continue to duck my question, an evasiveness which tells me all I need to know about your self-awareness. My comments get to the heart of the bridge offered by centrist theology for the divide between conservative and progressive theology. Could you at least comment on Billy Graham's insight?

No. I am not being evasive. I quoted @Mendalla (whose comments you appreciated) and answered in like vein. I have answered your question.

Please refrain from making judgements about my self awareness.

Billy Graham seems to be saying some Christians' experiences are less valid than others.

 

[paradox3]

@unsafe
I came across that reading when I was searching for info about centrist theology.

It raises an interesting question. Was Jesus a centrist? Maybe he was. Centrist theology often pulls from both ends of the spectrum.

Jesus relied heavily on some traditional Jewish teachings yet also advocated for radical change. So I dunno.

Interested in what you and others think about this.

 

[Mendalla]

No I am not ducking your question but I was a little thrown to see it appear on this thread. How is it relevant to to the topic of centrist theology?

This, I think. I am pretty sure there's another thread somewhere where the discussion about P3's search for a new church belongs.

Back on topic, while I identify as a centrist politically, I am not sure that applies theologically. In fact, having "left the fold", not sure I am even on the scale anymore. To my mind, we are talking about Christianity here, and I see myself in a somewhat broader way, having engaged with traditions like Buddhism and Hinduism, as well as philosophical understandings of our place in existence.