2 minute read
Hermeneutics means principles of interpretation. That much is at least fairly well known among Christians. The equally important term that almost nobody recognizes is prolegomena. It literally means “those things which are said first.” In Ancient Greek, it referred to the prefatory section of a book stating the goals and purposes for writing. In academic spaces, it has taken up this meta quality as the theological reflection on how we do theology. It’s about the careful study of all the underlying assumptions, methods, relationships, and purposes upon which theology depends.1
How many precious hours of life have been wasted trying to calm down Dispensationalists who are incensed over the age of the earth because they can’t comprehend basic hermeneutics like interpreting a biblical text according to its genre?2 It’s like defensive small talk. Likewise, how many useless, circular conversations are had with Reformed and Catholic Christians because they presume systematic theology is the ultimate objective of all theological reflection and, therefore, have little to no room for narrative theology within their spiritual schemas? It goes nowhere.
The problem certainly is not limited to more conservative Christians, though. Parallel problems exist among progressive Christians in Mainline Protestantism. As but two of endless possible examples, pro-LBGTQIA+ revisionists seem to think using the thought terminating cliché “love is love” is a valid way of spiritually bypassing all the hard theological work of exegesis and quite often there seems to be no limit whatsoever to their use of spiritualized reader-response criticism. Even when their destination is good and laudable, how they got there is often worrisome.3
Let me level with you. The reason I’ve become fairly disillusioned about talking theology, even with thoughtful Jesus followers, isn’t because it’s impractical.4 It’s because they habitually focus their attention on all these superficial arguments about positions X, Y, and Z when the interesting ideas lie in the unquestionable assumptions way back at A, B, and C. Unfortunately, we’ve been so enculturated to fixate on immediate application that there’s seemingly no room in our spiritual imagination for discourse about the underlying issues at work. Such self-criticism ain’t kosher.
The original beatniks weren’t academics but they were critical thinkers.5 That said, beatnik Christianity is not about bridging the gap between the ivory towers of academia and the pews as is often said by the practical theologians. The goal is rather to bridge the ivory towers and the barstools. As the Crackers & Grape Juice podcast crew describes it, it’s talking faith without stained glass language. The vision is for barstool honesty merged with in-depth critical thinking, including a theological focus pivoted to the underlying issues of hermeneutics and prolegomena.
If there were a master’s degree available in Theological Hermeneutics & Prolegomena, I’d be sorely tempted. Why? Because it’s unwise to keep building upon a poorly constructed foundation. This is how you end up with the Leaning Tower of Pisa.↩
It’s called an Ancient Near Eastern creation myth, people. Google it.↩
It’s like when you knowingly get a ride somewhere with someone who’s a terrible driver. You safely arrived, which is great, but you have no idea how you didn’t die 17 separate times on the way.↩
Quite the opposite, in fact!↩
Frankly, they probably could’ve used some more formula training. It would’ve altered the whole nature of the countercultural Beat Generation movement, but in my opinion it probably would’ve been for the better.↩
