Is Conversion a Four-Letter Word? Part V
I have appreciated the conversation on this series thus far. Please continue to share your thoughts, push back on something or share what you like or add some thoughts of your own. If you get the chance, read back through some of the comments they are rich. Now on with Part V.
How Postmodernity Affects the Congregations I Serve
The difficulty that this poses in the lives of people in the congregations that I serve is that some people hesitate to fully trust and live in the story of God for fear that if they do, they will end up like the arrogant bigots who tend to beat people over their heads with their Bibles. They would rather slit their wrists than to become “one of them.”
Yet the problem is that some people unwittingly start to hold onto to a form of what Hauerwas calls “vulgar relativism.” This is “the view that combines a relativistic account of ethical terms with a non-relativistic principle of toleration, fails to deal with real confrontation, since it assumes the impossibility of pointlessness of choosing between options that do not matter to anyone. The problem with vulgar relativism is it treats all moral convictions as if they were only notional commitments.” (Hauerwas 1981:104)
So when one narrative considers human trafficking to be profitable and another story considers it to be diabolical, the vulgar relativist is hung out to dry. Hauerwas concedes to holding to a kind of relativism and does not consider it the task of the church to “deny the reality of the multiplicity of stories in the world or to force the many stories into an artificial harmony” (Hauerwas 1981:91). Yet he does not hold to a “vulgar relativism” that would make him incapable of making judgments or unwilling to seek to change someone else’s mind or tradition. (Hauerwas 1981:101).
So, on the one hand, postmodernity has exposed the myth of objectivity. But on the other hand, those under the influence of postmodernity sometimes fall sway to a relativism that disenables them to take a stand against real evil. Where are we to go from here? Well, Smith notes that scriptures “give us good reason to reject the very notion of objectivity, while at the same time affirming the reality of truth and knowledge” (Smith 2006:43n). And while you are thinking about all of that, in my last two parts to this series, which will probably come next week, I have some advice for those who consider conversion a four-letter word, be it because of modernity or postmodernity’s influence. The next post is advice for those influenced by modernity.
From my own experience and recent reading (Wright most recently), I see the difficulty. We have in so many ways forced Jesus to fit within the Enlightenment conception of “god” that he is far from human & just another contending philosopher.
In casting aside objectivity, we need to go further through the postmodern critique to allow Jesus to define our understanding of God instead of the reverse. We need to go through the conception of “knowledge” as notional & propositional and recover an intimacy of knowing through love. I don’t think it’s a mistake that in Genesis, the intimacy even to the point of sexuality is to know.
Losing objectivity isn’t a loss when you think of it as the opportunity to become known instead. Sitting aside to render objective truth is impossible, destructive of the relationship, and not in following the example God sets throughout Scripture. He doesn’t simply “intervene” and upset sensible reality, he’s intimately entwined in history, constantly restoring, redeeming, and creating anew.
That can’t be relativized easily to vulgarity short of philosophical discourse, I don’t think. And it seems to be the meaningful retelling of distorted and often superficial meta-narratives. It’s not something one can deconstruct without becoming solipsist I imagine!
Jason,
I wholeheartedly agree with you about allowing Jesus to define our understanding of God, which as you will discover when I get to my advice, the final two parts, that Jesus is front and center stage.
I love your phrase, “Losing objectivity isn’t a loss when you think of it as the opportunity to become known instead.” Thanks again for your thoughts Jason.
Thanks JR, I’ve really appreciated your thoughts thus far, I’m very interested to see where they lead.
Jason,
Thanks man. Hey I was wondering if you are doing any blogging anywhere at the moment?
Soon… I made the commitment to follow through on living out simple, organic life with a small church for awhile before I started to wax poetically about it. One of my greatest frustrations (and one reason I enjoy gatherings like Ecclesia, etc… in response to it) is the lack of practitioners who are happy to weigh in with what amounts to a prophetic ministry to the church exploring those avenues.
I don’t see pictures of any prophets who didn’t share in the life of the people they came to bring light to, so I decided to wait for a little while. It’s been about 9 months for my organic community, and my wife and I have experimented with things like this for a few years, so I’ve been thinking of being a bit more public soon. God has put on my heart this year to act like a peer in the conversation, since I tell so many people I know the same thing!
Jason,
I can really appreciate that you want to take a kind of silence, in a way. I liked what Henri Nouwen has said about silence, “First, silence makes us pilgrims. Secondly, silence guards the fire within. Thirdly, silence teaches us to speak.” We live in a world of words and silence enables us to hear the voice of God, so that we can breath life into those around us by our careful choice of words. He talks about how as ministers we can give time for silence in our counseling, bringing people to Jesus, waiting for the Spirit’s direction. You will have to let me know when God leads you to go public. For I have certainly enjoyed your voice in this conversation. Peace.