marion grau

assistant professor of theology

church divinity school of the pacific

 www.cdsp.edu

add your site  

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.