Ask An Indie Theologian: Classical Theology – Building on Stone

John Plummer asked: “And other one – What are key resources in classical theology that modern indie folks can draw upon in finding our unique way forward?”

Hmmm. . .I’ve been sitting with this one since you asked it. I’ll admit that this will not be a complete answer – there are quite a few competing thoughts in my head so I’m going to pick a few to get the ball rolling so to speak.

First, I think it might be helpful to create a working definition of “classical theology” – here’s mine: the thinking and experience of the Apostolic/Late Antique church. That is to say up to about the 6th or 7th centuries.

Once you get beyond the late antique period you are no longer in the realm of “classical theology” but have entered medieval scholasticism in the west, and well, I don’t know what we would call it in the east, but scholasticism is a very different development. A development which is built upon classical theology; so you budding scholastics out there still have to go back to the source I think.

I ought to also point out here that I would not argue that a solid grounding in classical theology is an effort to re-create the apostolic church or an idealised past. I’m sure by now some regular readers are rather tired of me hammering on about this point – but it is, I think a very important point – especially in our contemporary religious climate (and I’m not exclusively pointing to our indie community here).

Rather – I believe that a solid grounding in classical theology paves the way for some really exciting contemporary theology. On one hand I think that in our OC/IC context, where we really need to invest in our voice and vision – cutting out the middle man (medieval, counter-reformation, 19th century ultra-montanism/tractarianism/spiritualism), or even just shaving his beard off, frees us to BE us – and to delve into the images, and ideas un-encumbered from the start (what we choose to bring in after we have started is an entirely different matter).

So, for these reasons, and more, I think the initial resource we might draw from classical theology is a conscious awareness of much needed building blocks – upon which we can then build, innovate, and re-develop and also to borrow (but do so fully aware of the reasons why, rather than blindly accepting an inherited image or idea)

Building blocks allow us to explore anew, and to answer for ourselves and others, questions related to central issues of our faith as we – for example – what are the mechanics of the incarnation and why do we perceive it the way we do – what value does it contribute to our understanding of Christ’s mission and purpose? What ramifications for later ideas such as (for those who accept it) “original sin” do these ideas have? How does this lead to new understandings? Are these understandings unique to our community or do we share them with other Christian traditions?

I would add that the great thing about classical theology – regardless of the theological perspectives you may now hold – is that all of us (indie or no) share this heritage and so it immediately creates a common starting point for discussion, and exploration. Once you get beyond the late antique period you begin to see quite a bit of divergence – particularly between East & West, but also within those traditions. “Classical theology” is the common denomonator to it all the bedrock upon which the vast majority of later theology is built.

There is another, more pragmatic point to make here. The works of “classical” theology are readily available, and cheap (often free if you know where to look). Moreover, there is a host of equally available, and inexpensive resources to help explain and explore them. In our indie context where many of our ministers are trained within the ranks rather than at universities (for my thoughts on this see my April 18 Post: Degree or Not Degree) I think this is a huge boon.

This also leads to another related point – if our various communities used classical theology as building blocks, and grounded the majority of our ordained ministers (and where possible our laity) in them, given the fluidity with which our folks move among synods it would ensure a confidence of “basic knowledge” upon which to work with. This is a tangent I admit – but it is not unrelated to the initial question (I don’t think).

One of the best resources that we can draw from classical theology then, is the building blocks it provides for future development and a common denomonator that would I think facilitate cooperation and dialogue.