The Core Challenge to Faith

Share:

To distinguish theology from ideology, I need to start where our faith is most insistent: our belief that God loves this world and its people. We believe the Creator loves the creation and has committed to its life and well-being. Moreover, God makes covenants and remains faithful to them even when the human partners in those covenants do not. So committed is God to these covenants that God no longer accepts a future (for God’s Self) without the covenant people. These are bold assertions, and the objections to them are many. The academic objections can take care of themselves as discussion continues. The existential protests against such a gospel come from human suffering and degradation that fly in the face of our assertions that God loves the world and wills its well-being and wholeness. This coming Sunday’s sermon on just this idea, not yet written, is called, “You Couldn’t Prove It by Me.”

These conflicts between our gospel and actual human experience we must not be dismissed or rationalized by making our belief ideological. To be faithful, we must stick with both the God who loves and the people whose lives belie that claim. To walk away from either is faithless, but strange as it may sound, the greater betrayal of God is to walk away from the world and its people.

Continue reading →

Theology Not Ideology

Share:

Ideology makes smart people stupid. No, it doesn’t decrease the IQ or the cleverness with which the ideologue defends a position and attacks others who dissent, but it makes people think and act as though they were stupid. Here’s what I mean.

To be an ideologue is not just to hold beliefs strongly but to hold to a belief system that dictates the way reality must be, no matter what. Facts must be made to conform to the ideologue’s beliefs, even when they don’t. So, the ideologue must dismiss facts or else distort them to maintain beliefs which are held as absolute.

In his book I’m just beginning to read, The Cross in Our Context, the Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall, introduces us to the theology he develops first in the manner called via negativa, by saying what it is not. One of the things his theology of the cross is not and must not become is an ideology. Hall writes:

By ideology I mean a theoretical statement or system of interpretation that functions for its adherents as a full and sufficient credo, a source of personal authority, and an intellectually and psychologically comforting insulation from the frightening and chaotic mish-mash of daily existence. For the ideologue, whether religious or political, it is not necessary to expose oneself constantly to the ongoingness of life; one knows in advance what one is going to find in the world. (25).

Continue reading →