|
marion
grau
assistant
professor of theology
church
divinity school of the pacific
www.cdsp.edu
1.
How would you define postmodern culture?
It
is notoriously problematic to define ‘postmodern’, since it
means many things to many people. I myself try to avoid the
term, if possible, since it often carries negative connotations
that may keep those not able or willing to explore the issues
involved in the ‘postmodern’ from a more balanced approach.
Often the term postmodern is used, especially among
conversations of the more conservative Christian variety, it
seems to imply a hopeless, dangerous relativism against which
only a reassertion of something lifted up as ‘orthodox’ or
‘tradition’ would seem to help. At the same time, however,
these conversations are in danger of becoming triumphalist if
the assumption is that ‘postmodern’ means simply the decline
of the ‘modern’, identified as that which has threatened
Christian faith, and that within ‘postmodernity’ the
religious and faith experience a new upsurge.
It
certainly is a hopeful sign that there is a new openness for a
variety of forms of faith and religion in contemporary culture,
it certainly makes my own work more exciting. Still, I find it
highly problematic to assume ‘postmodern’ might mean simply
a return to the pre-modern. A complete and blanket denial and
rejection of those philosophical and historical inquiries that
have critiqued and questioned the assumptions of classical
Christian theism is a dangerous overgeneralization.
At
its best, ‘postmodern’ culture might describe a climate in
which it has become possible to question the hegemony of modern
Western models of thinking as they have spread across the globe
during modernity. These models may include concepts of the
absolute superiority of Western capitalism, Western cultural
values such as progress, as well as Western varieties of
Christianity that have been complicit in bolstering the project
of spreading a complex compound of these values that have served
to oppress and exploit other peoples.
One
of the problems with the term ‘postmodern’ is whether it is
a term that can be applied ‘globally’ or is relevant only in
a Western context, a context which has experienced and developed
notions of the modern. However, it is also becoming ever more
clear that, for better and often for worse, hardly anybody on
this planet can extricate themselves from the effects,
climatically, economically, or politically, of the sprawl of
Western cultural values around the globe.
2.
With the flux of reality current cultures are experiencing
post-9/11, what do you believe will be the three main points of
a neo-orthodox postmodern culture?
The
term neo-orthodox remains somewhat opaque to me. Does it here
refer to the American interpretation of theologies such as those
of Karl Barth and the Niebuhrs, or to some new inscription of
orthodoxy ‘after modernity’? To me, a neo-orthodox project
does not seem a helpful term, since studies of doctrinal
development easily reveal how fragile and problematic notions of
orthodoxy have always been. Who would be the authority that
would reinstitute such a perceived orthodoxy? Rather, it seems
to me important, especially in the wake of 9/11 to admit and
appreciate the variety of teachings within the Christian
tradition and to appreciate also the variety of faiths and
interpretations in Islamic traditions, so as to deflect the
highly problematic polarizations between ‘us’ and ‘them’
in the wake of the attacks on the WTC, especially also among
Christians. The most useful response Christian communities can
offer, it seems to me, is a sense of humility in the face of the
Other, that remembers the Christian tradition’s own
complicities in genocidal acts such as the crusades and thus
resists the temptation to see itself as the victims only, but
remembers the violent historical spiral of forcible Christian
mission and colonization that has been imposed on other peoples
for centuries. It would seem to me that to rethink an authentic,
joyful, and yet humble and loving witness for the Christian
faith would include a sense of metanoia,
of repentance for the sins of our fathers and our mothers and
ourselves, whether known or not, that have lead and continue to
sustain economic and cultural oppressions of those we deem less
than us around the globe. This sense of repentance should then
be translated into a changed way of being within this world
which is God’s creation and to act responsibly in our use of
the resources that belong to all who live on this planet, not
only to those of us lucky to be able to exploit them at a rate
that is leading to more and more inequality and deterioration of
this creation, which God has called ‘good’.
One
way of perceiving the task of constructive theology in this time
would be to work critically reconstruct the orthodoxies of the
past in a more relational context that does not primarily seek
to express difference only but also relation, that respects and
honors differences in race, gender, sex and culture. To love our
neighbor as ourselves includes working towards change so that
every creature on this planet has a chance to receive the full
bounty of God’s grace.
3.
What impact, positive or negative, do you think a postmodern
culture will have upon the church?
Again,
I would have to say that there are numerous postmodern cultures,
and untold variations of being a church in the present context.
One of the things we have seen since the 1960s, which is about
the time many begin to apply the term ‘postmodern’, is the
emergence of a multitude of voices that previously had only very
little if any chance in shaping the Christian tradition or the
church. The voices of women, of African American men and women,
of Gays and Lesbians, of Hispanic and Latino Christians have
represented great challenges to mainline and other Christian
communities. I think it is our task as those who are members of
the ‘church,’ whatever form it might take, to take a very
good look at the challenges and gifts these voices have to give
to us. Some of the questions that will have to be pondered are:
What
is the role of women in contemporary Christian communities?
Where are women represented, where do we hear women’s voices
beyond bland assertions of family values and affirmations of
male headship? How will we approach the issue of racism and
ethnic bias in our faith communities? What is the role of
Christians in a society that blatantly worships Mammon and has
little awareness of the way in which this religious undercurrent
proliferates injustice both at home and abroad? What is the role
of Christians in societies whose consumption patterns use up
more than their fair share of the creation we have been
entrusted with? These challenges and questions represent to me a
chance to grow into inclusive communities with a prophetic
witness that points out and works to counteract oppressive
structures in government, society and church, wherever those may
become manifest.
4.
What lessons for the future do you wish a postmodern culture
could learn from the past?
I
am answering this question in terms of the Christian
communities, since that seems somewhat more limited, though I do
hope that similar conversations evolve elsewhere.
I
do wish that we could repent of our arrogance and ignorance in
regard to the way in which Christian theology and Christian
organizations and churches have contributed to the exploitation
of creation and people across the world throughout modernity,
and I do sincerely hope that we learn to live as modest and yet
joyful witnesses to the faith which is named after a man who
called for repentance, challenged the status quo and pushed
those around him beyond the comfort level. To listen to the
wisdom and the truth of other Christian voices, those of women,
of African Americans, of Native American Christians, of Latino
and Hispanic Christians, and to be in critical dialogue with
them is crucial.
5.
Who do you believe are the three most influential writers for a
postmodern culture?
This
is a rather difficult question to answer. The ones that come to
my mind would not easily fit under the term postmodern, since
that term relates more to architecture and art. I find the term
‘critical theory’ more flexible and useful. The writers I
think of are often thought to be post-structuralist, and more
subtly critical and yet very engaged with the questions modern
thinkers have begun to ask. Derrida and Foucault have been
important to me, but are not without problems in their limited
awareness and response to issues of gender and race. Luce
Irigaray and Helene Cixous has been important in terms of
feminist theory, though one would also hardly call her
‘postmodern.’ I am currently most excited about entering
into conversation with post-colonial thought. The writing of
Gayatri Spivak and Homi Bhabha, as well as Edward Said (who has
been very useful in deciphering some of the colonial history
that has led up to 9/11) has many questions to offer to those of
us engaged in thinking about what Christian communities and
theologies could look like in the future. These are more than
three writers, I apologize.
6.
In a postmodern culture, deconstruction is a driving force.
What, if any, part of Christianity do you see as
“off-limits” and why?
We
did not have to wait for deconstruction to come along to be
critically engaging our faith. Negative, or apophatic theology,
which many have compared to deconstruction, has been around for
millennia before deconstruction. As Derrida, whose term
deconstruction is, has pointed out, ‘deconstruction’ does
not mean destruction, here he differs from Martin Heidegger.
Deconstruction, as I understand it, rather points to the fact
that we interpret everything in and around us in a way that is
similar to interpreting a text. There are many ways of reading
and interpreting a text. Deconstruction uncovers that we do not
have any ultimate control over what a text may mean to others,
or what an author intended to say with a text, that, in short,
the processes involved in communicating are rather slippery. But
rather than simply assuming (as has happened in simplistic
readings of deconstruction) that we can read into a text
whatever we want to, deconstruction to me implies reading with
care, with indelible care. Those of us who would agree with
Anselm of Canterbury that ‘faith seeks understanding’ always
and everywhere, might thus embrace deconstruction as a way to
become more honest in their own faith process. The disciple
Thomas might perhaps be claimed as the patron saint of
deconstruction, since he could stand for all of those who would
not leave their brain behind at the church door, but who believe
the more important our faith is to us, the more we must take
responsibility for exploring and engaging it.
7.
How do you see the Anglican church changing to reach a
postmodern culture, if at all?
The
Anglican Communion has perhaps inherited a history that may feel
rather comfortable with some ‘postmodern’ aspects of
culture. Known as the ‘via media’ between Roman Catholicism
and the Protestant Reformation, it has always had to negotiate
between alternatives that were often cast as diametrically
opposed. In its current form, Anglican communities exist in a
variety that ranges from Anglo-Catholic to liberal, to
progressive, to evangelical, thus forming a very diverse body.
To be able to embrace, if at times with great tension, this
diversity is a charisma and a challenge for the Anglican
community. It is part of the challenge of deconstruction, for
example, that we recognize that dualisms do not and have never
served us well when exploring the context we live in. Another
facet of the charisma and the challenge of the Anglican
community is its diversity in doctrine, practice, ethnic and
cultural variety. From my perspective, the most exciting
question is how a previously colonial church, that has expanded
with the former British empire and its sphere of influence, will
learn to come to terms with its history of mission, its ethnic
diversity and class differences. The Episcopal Church (USA) in
particular has moved ahead to show its inclusivity towards women
by embracing them as priests and bishops, and, depending on
region and context, has welcomed gays and lesbians as called to
the priesthood as well. I take most hope in the growing
awareness in the Episcopal Church around issues of ecology and
economic disparity, which I believe are the two major issues
facing not only that church, but the entire Anglican community,
as well all those who live on this planet.
Any
Closing Thoughts?
The
question of evangelism and evangelization has recently been
raised in the Anglican/Episcopal community. Thus I would like to
reflect on this question here.
The
mainline churches have missed the boat in terms of
evangelization too often, partly because it has such a bad
reputation among their constituents, many of whom are refugees
from fundamentalist contexts, and many members would rather be
caught dead that be caught ‘evangelizing.’ And yet, it seems
to me that both mainliners and evangelicals could learn from
each other. While mainliners may have thoughts and practices to
offer in terms of openness and inclusivity, evangelicals have
been very confident and comfortable witnessing about the
preciousness of their faith. It would seem important to me that
progressive Episcopalians find a new appreciation of the values
of a (modestly and thoughtfully witnessed) evangelical faith and
that evangelical Episcopalians (and other Evangelicals, for that
matter) might be able to be more inclusive of difference in
faith expression, gender, and sexuality.
If
postmodern evangelism skips over self-criticism and refuses to
learning from past mistakes to create a more humble and inviting
form of ministry, much needed wisdom would be lost. If
evangelism in postmodernity, whatever that may mean, simply
resumes arrogant, triumphalist modes of proclamation, because it
seems as if modernity has finally lost out, I would think we
have learned nothing whatsoever. I see too many people in my
classes, and too many of my colleagues in theology and religion,
who have been hurt and broken, some of whom cannot stomach the
words Bible, Jesus, and Christian without gagging because they
have been beaten over the head with it.
The
opening in contemporary discourse that invites theology,
religion and spirituality in in new ways will not tolerate
modernist fundamentalist assertions of superiority. Modest
witnessing is the name of the game. Self-confident and joyful,
yes, but without brutalizing and banging in the door. I continue
to see the bleeding wounds of refugees from fundamentalism and
evangelism that have yet been able to preserve some kind of
faith rather than becoming staunch atheists, with wounds of the
spirit that are so deep that I can not even begin to bind them,
much less contribute to their healing. Evangelization is not
helpful if it creates angry, cynical people rather than people
with an engaged faith on the way to spiritual health and
freedom.
Evangelizing
could be an inviting encounter in respectful acceptance of the
difference and the face of the other and not be the equivalent
of spiritual rape.
With
regard to Evangelicalisms as they exist in many variations
throughout the world, it seems to me that the future of an
effective, socially and culturally pertinent evangelism is one
that has learned enough from modes of biblical criticism to
critically examine its own reading practices, without
compromising its integrity or faith. Simply rejoicing as if the
presumed advent of postmodernity meant that modernity and
enlightenment has never happened is neither realistic nor
productive. Randall Ballmer has importantly demonstrated in his
writing how varied and multi-spectered past and contemporary
varieties of evangelicalism have been. There are fundamentalists
on the one side of the spectrum and social activist, evangelical
environmental network evangelicals on the other, and many
varieties in between. There are evangelicals in mainline
churches, the Anglican community and Episcopal Church being one
community that is committed to encompass a wide variety of forms
of faith.
|
