2 minute read
After revealing my researched perspective on a particularly controversial theological topic, a pastor friend asked, “Was there anyone else intimately involved in the discernment or did it come from your own autonomous research and individual reflection?” Ya know, that’s a valid question. As someone who maintains the Bible was primarily intended to be read, interpreted, and applied corporately, I deeply appreciate the community orientation of the inquiry. I’d love participating in a communal deliberative process. The problem is I have no idea where to find such a thing.
I’m open to being wrong, so you tell me if I’m overstating the point. Outside the context of higher education, have you experienced a Bible Study where the community performed an intensive study of the text that a) explored a highly controversial issue,1 b) involved curious examination of different scholarly perspectives, and c) truly didn’t have a predetermined outcome? I’ve spent time in a whole lot of different Christian circles and have never encountered something like that. That simply is not the social function or spiritual purpose of the activity we call “Bible Study.”2
The same goes for book studies. For example, I’ve observed a pattern over the course of 13 years in the Anglican tradition. Strongly conservative groups won’t use anything by N.T. Wright because they think him too revisionist on issues like women’s ordination. Meanwhile, progressives also eschew his work because they think him bigoted on same-sex marriage. It’s only groups with people ranging from left-of-center to right-of-center who will use Wright’s books. Why? Because he’ll safely reiterate what they already mostly think. There’s no discerning study involved.3
Christians are hard-pressed to find clergy with M.Divs who are willing to reconsider core beliefs. It then follows that it’s exceptionally rare to find a group of laity who possess the skills, time, and willingness to be part of a communal deliberative process.4 It’s even difficult to get theologians to open-mindedly consider scholarship outside of the narrow bandwidth of their educational background, church tradition, and ideological commitments. People prefer their tribalistic echo chambers, which makes it nearly impossible to carefully discern complex issues in community.
The original beatniks talked things out in community but were highly individualistic in how they decided on things. I wish we even had that much balance! As Karen Keen astutely observed, much of Christian culture lacks a deliberative process for communally working through contested interpretations, conflicting priorities, and all the other complexities of life together.5 Sadly, the options seem to be half-ass improvisation by a committee, unilateral declarations by a spiritual authority, or research done in relative isolation. I wish there were another option widely available.
I’ve got in mind something more controversial than Calvinism vs. Arminianism or sacraments vs. ordinances. Instead I’m talking about hotly contested issues like gender roles, Romans 1:26-28, the death penalty, tithing, immigration, or Open Theism.↩
In reality, it’s less of a Bible Study and more of a Biblical Confirmation Bias.↩
It’s self-congratulatory regurgitation.↩
It makes sense. By definition they tend to have professional knowledge in other areas.↩
The exception that proves the rule may be Roman Catholicism’s multi-year church councils.↩
