1

Postmodern Spirituality Seminar by prof.dr.Frank Sawyer 2011

I. Introduction

PREMODERN/MODERN1 LATEMODERN/POSTMODERN

grand narratives/ideologies personal stories/experiences

given meaning(s) chosen meaning(s)

classifications new mixing

hierarchy networking

form/design chance/openness

mechanical/physical electronic/virtual reality

traditional paradigms new paradigms

established patterns flexible choices

allegiance to group identity irony/scepticism toward group allegiance

community identity selfexpression

conformity own path/true to self

identity given by community search to create own identity

in-depth startingpoints surfing perspectives

causal logic (deductive) results based (inductive)

objective observation subjective passion

sapere aude dare to know what can I know?

established values search for values

culture as finished products cultural expressions as happenings

construction of systems deconstruction of systems

calculating logic surprise/random opportunity

past & present present & future

slower change/durability rapid change/the moment

reformation of old organizations birth of new networks

chronos kairos

paranoia (defend systems) schizophrenia (loss of integral meaning)

fanaticism escapism

judgement on others we are all sick: therapeutic mode

antithesis synthesis

good/evil categorically clear what is right/wrong?

1 Howard A. Snyder, Earth Currents: The Struggle for the Worlds Soul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995), 217.

Charles Taylor touches on many of these points in A Secular Age (London: Harvard University Press, 2007).

2

faith as doctrine/system faith as pathway/pilgrimage

institutional religion freedom of spirituality

sin estrangement

law of God voice of conscience

God the Creator presence of the Spirit

Christ the Divine Saviour Jesus our friend/leader

church as institution church as fellowship

divine revelation completes divine revelation initiates a

our natural understanding new understanding

In this study I would like to deal with Christian theological concepts in relation to

postmodern spirituality. We could also call the theological concepts biblical themes. But I use

the term theological concepts because the biblical themes need to be interpreted and applied

for today. When we do that, we are creating a theological view on these themes. By

spirituality I mean the faith-aspect which becomes integrated into all of life. Life has many

dimensions, such as the physical, psychological, social, and ethical. It is best to think

holistically about life, because all aspects are always present and always relating to each

other. This happens, of course, both in harmony and disharmony, also in relation to faith or

religion, which often is experienced fragmentarily, with plenty of ambiguity because pure

spirituality is so often mixed with human self-interest.

When we speak of postmodern we mean the contemporary late-modern situation in

western society. Of course, western society has spread to many parts of the globe and we

could also call it democratic capitalist society. Postmodern refers to that which has come after

the modern age, which we may say was (and still is) typified by the Enlightenment. The

Enlightenment is the cultural movement of the rise of modern science and modern rationalist

philosophy along with technology. The reaction to the Enlightenment was what we call the

Romantic movement. The Enlightenment emphasized reason (understood as objective and

available to all who can think logically). The Romantic movement emphasized will (understood

as the free personality who subjectively creates his role on the stage of life). A further addition

was contributed by Existentialist philosophy and literature which took the free personality

idea and placed it in a postmodern setting in which there is no common worldview or objective

values. Postmodern spirituality has inherited this step by step movement away from objective

reason and has moved to more subjective choices. But it is not only a matter of new

philosophical movements; the great changes go hand in hand with globalization by means of

which cultures from around the world more and more are living not just side by side, but also

interspersed within each others traditional territories. So a key aspect of our postmodern

situation is plurality. There is both continuity and discontinuity during historical paradigm

changes. A long view on the history of culture reminds us that culture has been led by a variety

3

of worldviews, such as the stages often referred to as 1) mythical, 2) ontologically-static, and 3)

functional-technical approaches.2 Or more concretely, societies can be dominated by

governments, religion, the military, the media, science and technology, family life, or things like

sports and entertainment. As culture patterns change we lose something and gain something.

What we gain is a plurality of choices and new syntheses. What we lose is an adequate answer

that can be given easily by any one standpoint. Thus we have multiple views on things, and we

might learn something from them all. For example, if we ask about human nature, we get a

compendium of answers.3 And this of course is the case for all the big questions.

We can characterise the postmodern person and situation, as:

1) individualised (we are the centre of our network);

2) pluralised: we are interculturally globalised;

3) virtualised as in the sense of virtual reality, especially via the media screens;

4) mobile, we experience life as tourists do (observing without much participation);

5) secularised, with only fragmentary horizontal meanings.4

Everywhere we turn via books, the media, and daily conversations, there is a recognition

that traditional values are under critique while the new values are still somewhat shaky. We

frequently hear about new deadly sins in our modern/postmodern world, about endangered

values, and about a collapse of contemporary cultural traditions.5 Postmodern people have no

given identity because society is no longer integral or wholistic; so we end up seeking an

identity among the numerous choices we need to make.

II. Philosophical path

Many large books are being written about the theme of how we have moved from the

ancient to the modern and now to the late modern/postmodern situation. What I would like to

do here is merely mention some stepping stones along the path. It is worth noting that the

movement of western thought and society has been analysed as led by a changing dialectical

motif. Dooyeweerd6 thinks that the Greeks were led by a philosophical dialectic between

eternal form and transient matter, while the Medieval Age synthesized this into a theological

dialectic of nature and grace. Modern/postmodern thought follows a dialectic between

2 C.A. van Peursen, Cultuur in stroomversnelling: strategie van de cultuur (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1975).

3 Leslie Stevenson & David L. Haberman, Ten Theories of Human Nature (Oxford: University Press, 1998).

4 Zygmunt Bauman, Life in Fragments: Essays in Postmodern Morality (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995).

5 Konrad Lorenz, Civilized Mans Eight Deadly Sins (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1974). Jimmy Carter, Our

Endangered Values: Americas Moral Crisis (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001). Rob Weatherill, Cultural Collapse

(London: Free Association Books, 1994). 6 Herman Dooyeweerd, Roots of Western Culture: Pagan, Secular, and Christian Options (Toronto: Wedge

Publishing, 1979).

4

scientific determinism and freedom of personality. So we hear voices saying that we are not

much more than the product of our DNA, while others say we have no fixed essence and we are

nothing more than the choices we make.

Of course, ancient societies also displayed elements of what we find in the postmodern

situation. For example, globalisation was a strong characteristic of the Hellenistic age, when

various cultures conquered by Alexander the Great and then after that by Rome, brought the

Egyptian, Persian, Greek, and Latin world into daily contact. All over the region the same

philosophies and religions were being propagated partly as alternatives, partly in synthesis

with each other (not unlike today). Ancient societies also had other so-called postmodern

features, such as individualism and scepticism. But what is it that makes us speak

philosophically of a postmodern situation? It is clear that the path after the Middle Ages in

western society has gone via the Renaissance and Enlightenment, further along to

Romanticism, Existentialism, and postmodern attitudes. One of the differences compared to

past centuries, is that the same elements (globalisation, scepticism, etc.) are now no longer the

experience of the elite, but dominate all across society. Further, the same elements now are

empowered by the modern media, so that changes are rapid and far reaching.

We may sketch things as follows. The modern age led to the rise of the individual.

Descartes made a step in this direction by saying that we should doubt everything and then

through our individual mind, rebuild our certainties, or believable truths. But Luther had

already said: Here I stand. That was to claim that an individual can more rightly interpret the

Bible than some church traditions and councils may have achieved. Luther was not talking

about the autonomous individual, but rather about the individual conscience and knowledge

based on the interpretation of the Word of God. But this is still a form of individuality, which led

to more freedom of religion, but also to the individualism of much contemporary

Protestantism.

Kant puts it in a strong way by saying: Dare to use your reason. We must think for

ourselves. This great truth should not be denied. But it easily became one more step toward the

postmodern situation of the relativity of all truths and values. Kant said that we cannot know

objective reality directly; what we know comes through the minds categories of reception and

interpretation. Taking this further, we come to views like Thomas Kuhns paradigms of scientific

knowledge, which are not neutral, but reflect established viewpoints or interests. If we add to

this the social construction emphasis in modern times on the historical relativity of human

ideas and systems, we eventually end with deconstruction or a poststructualist approach to

truth, meaning, power and purpose (championed in postmodern times by Jacques Derrida and

Michel Foucault). There is much to learn from these approaches (even if they in turn have some

blind spots).

The Romantic reaction to the Enlightenment and to the pressures of scientific

worldviews and technology, led to a greater affirmation of the individual character, in the sense

5

of the following of my own vision, will, gifts, and potentialities. But it was Existentialism which

clearly expressed the postmodern situation as a search for authenticity, as expressed by

Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Sartre and Camus (among many more). Albert

Camus wrote a famous novel called The Stranger. One can only understand this book when one

sees that it is an introduction to the estrangement of the postmodern person or self, which is

no longer integrated by traditional views or a common cultural heritage. Of course, great

literature has always been existentialist in the sense of placing major ethical, philosophical, and

religious choices before us. That is the essence of many dramas and novels. We find this

existential element in the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, as also in Shakespeare and Madach. It is

expressed for the whole History of Hungary in Endre Adys The Lost Rider (Az eltvedt lovas).7

The difference between the more classical or traditional situation compared to the postmodern

situation, is that the postmodern person does not believe that any adequate map has been

given. Classically, those lost return to the proven values. Or in biblical language: the lost son

returns to the Father. But postmodern people are already sons of the lost son they are farther

removed from the Father. Traditional values, religious views on the meaning of life, ideological

answers, and even science and technology, are dethroned as saviours. In that sense we can

expect something good from postmodernism, for it asks critical questions. But the other side of

the coin is that we are left with the needle of the compass swinging round and around, unable

to find true north. In the history of philosophy Nietzsche is the first most fully postmodern

thinker. But he was not so much a systematic thinker as an aphoristic and literary one

therefore he wrote existentially. But he is one of the most influential postmodern thinkers, and

many who came after him thought that he had expressed the postmodern situation clearly for

the 20th century and beyond. After Nietzsche, theology could never be the same.8 This does not

mean that theology disappears. Not all existentialist and postmodern thinkers have rejected

faith or theology. Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky are prime examples of those who thought that

faith was all the more necessary when there is a loss of meaning and a loss of values. And

others, for example Paul Tillich, have attempted to write a theology of correlation for the

contemporary situation. We can ask how non-theological views and experiences talk about

some of the themes of theology in non-theological terminology, which have parallels in

theology. For example, Tillich calls faith our ultimate concern.

We should add that thinkers such as Marcuse and many more raised the critique against

the one-dimensional society (especially understood as technologically dominated). Marcuse

did this within a neomarxist dialectical analysis of power. We may note that the Ellul, who

began as a neomarxist and became a Christian, also analysed the problem of the techno-

77

See, The Lost Rider: A bilingual anthology The Corvina Book of Hungarian Verse (Budapest: Corvina Books,

1997), 160-163. 8 A. Prosman, Geloven na Nietzsche: Nietzsches nihilism in de spiegel van de theologie (Zoetermeer:

Boekencentrum, 2007).

6

dominance in The Technological Society, published already in 1950. These kinds of critique of

modernism saw the danger of the closed systems, closed societies, and the fanaticism of

ideologies.

We may conclude at this point that the postmodern situation involves globalisation,

technology, the consumer society, in the face of personal estrangement and existential

questions among other factors such as world poverty and the damaging of the ecology. All

of this together is putting great pressure on the search for a new direction for society and

culture today. Many intellectuals in the west turn to the east to balance out the effects of

modernism.9 However, not only western culture is in a crisis concerning its values and choices;

so are other cultures. Islamic society is trying to preserve its identity, and many parts of the

world, such as Africa and Latin America, are trying to keep and develop their identity while

entering the on-going one-dimensionalisation via globalisation. Globalisation centralizes

business, education, and the media. But at the same time there is continuing new in-put (for

example via the internet) by groups shoring up their dykes against the globalizing tendencies.

Postmodern thinkers have something positive to contribute: they see that we must not

only control nature, but first of all participate in harmony with nature; they see that the

economy and technology are not autonomous dimensions; they reject closed systems; and,

they say that meaning must be personal, not merely given by traditions. The weakness for

postmodern thinkers is often that they do not find enough guidance in the labyrinth of choices.

Or, we may say: while postmodernism sees that ideological positions are not objective nor

eternal, they may go too far in thinking that master narratives (worldviews, broad framework

pictures) are indispensable. Taylor is correct when he says that master narratives are essential

to our thinking.10 Without these our lives disintegrate and the fragments no longer fit into a

pattern as many are saying today. So the questions today are:

1) Shall we survive the consumer society which pursues ever more economic growth?

Shall the ecology survive this?

2) Shall we survive life as a virtual reality in the age of technologic which is increasingly

efficient but in some ways dehumanising?

3) Shall we survive the idea of democracy which leads to pluralisation and perhaps to

the relativity of all values? Will this mean a clash between cultures and ethnic groups as we

increase in globalisation?

4) Shall we survive the secularisation of life which leads to a loss of transcendent (higher

and wider) meaning? Will secularisation lead to new gods (idols, ideologies) which demand our

allegiance?

9 Ulrich Libbrecht, Within the Four Seas: Introduction to Comparative Philosophy (Leuven: Peeters, 2007).

10 Taylor, 573. See also Snyder, ch. 15: Postmodernism: The Death of Worldviews?, 213ff.

7

Said in another way, no one doubts that there is a crisis of values and culture (which

may be a downhill situation, or a new and vital turning point).11

Having sketched the problematic situation let us now turn to our topic of spirituality and

examine some theological themes. But let us not forget that this all leads to a practical question

about how we should live.12

III. Theological path

We shall divide our discussion into a few theological themes, which could be greatly

multiplied. For each point we shall (a) mention traditional theological views and (b) compare

these to postmodern views, adding (c) some evaluative remarks. In general, my view is that

both older and newer spiritualities (running across many centuries) all exhibit strengths and

malaise. The older ones often had forced conformities easily leading to hypocrisy and a

confusion of faith and worldly power, as well as the confusion of faith and human dogmas. The

newer ones are sometimes noncommittal and confuse freedom of choice with an over

extended relativism. They may confuse comfortable feelings or entertaining music with

salvation. Classical and contemporary liturgies sometimes tell us more about ourselves than

about God, though some ways of worship do lift us out of ourselves into Gods presence.

1. DIVINE TRANSCENDENCE: the freedom and sovereignty of God

a). A traditional theological theme is the sovereignty of God. The other side of this view

is that human people are finite and frail. Like the grass of the field, we bloom in the morning

and whither in the evening. By contrast, God is eternal, all-powerful, and the word of our God

stands forever (Isaiah 40:6-8). Another aspect of divine transcendence is that we cannot

control God, and indeed, Gods ways are higher than our ways, his thoughts than our

thoughts (Isaiah 55:8,9 and context, which is about Gods mercy). For traditional theology, the

sovereignty, transcendence, and mercy of God are among the reasons we worship God: this

view gives us a feeling of awe. It further is often understood to give us comfort: someone is in

control and someone cares about us. The idea of providence is closely related to the idea of

Gods sovereignty. However, sometimes this became a fixed concept, so that when God tells

Moses that his name is Yahwe, I am who I am, this was sometimes interpreted by theology in

Aristotelian terms to mean that God is the unchanging one, the immovable first principle. The

other side of the revelation of this name was then lost. The other half of the meaning is that

Yahwe means: I am the one who is true to my people, and I will go with you, Moses. There is

quite a jump between understanding God as first principle or as one who accompanies us in

11

Hans Kng, Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic (New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1991). Joseph

Ratzinger, Christianity and the Crisis of Cultures (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2006). 12

Francis A. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live? The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (Wheaton:

Crossway Books, 1976). Rob Weatherill, Cultural Collapse (London: Free Association Books, 1994).

8

history. Both sides are part of the sovereign Gods freedom to be true to his own essence, and

to be true to his covenant with his people.

b). What does this mean to postmodern people? Many have become exclusive (secular)

humanists. This means: life is lived as merely natural without supernatural categories.13 Life is

often lived horizontally without any great framework or final perspective. This is part of the

definition of the postmodern mind: the great stories, the ideologies full of promise, have

failed. Some speculate about the end of religion.14 But other studies show that many forms of

faith (churchly, sectarian, cultic) abound.15 The postmodern mind is influenced by, but also

critical of religion, science, and political ideologies. In the case of the idea of Gods sovereignty,

this is thought to belong to an old worldview which was magical and later mechanistic

(Newtonian physics), but is not part of the contemporary view (which is more quantum, or

unpredictable). The contemporary view is more likely to say that whatever divinity there may

be, is a divinity in process, along with the history of humankind. The postmodern mind does

not have an antenna for thinking about essences and absolutes; but it does have an antenna

for talking about a spiritual pilgrimage in history. This could in some ways be closer to the Bible

and to early church history which saw life as a pilgrimage. But in late modern societies religion

is now far from its monolithic past. Religion, like all the rest of life, is more individualised,

privatised, differentiated from other spheres, and must compete with much disenchantment

and technologic.

c). By way of evaluation, we may say that in spite of the demise of the sovereignty of

God for modern and postmodern people, there are always some who pursue the search for

transcendence. When modern and postmodern people seek a religious transcendence, or

experience of the divine and holy, then they may likely think that wherever spirituality is found

(for example in all religions, east and west), these can be mixed into an enriching pattern for

their own spirituality.

This has a double side. On the one hand, wherever the divine is honoured, there will be

some comparable experiences (such as worship, prayer, conversion). On the other hand, not all

spirituality brings us equally close to God. And some spiritualities can distort our understanding

of God. When that happens, God becomes like a puppet whom we control so that religious and

theological speaking become merely our own preferred ideas and ideologies. So obviously our

faith, religious experience, and our theology must be dynamically open to improvement!

All of this suits the understanding of Gods sovereignty and transcendence. We cannot

make perfect church doctrines or theology about God. When we build a closed religious system,

13

Craig M. Gay, The Way of the (Modern) World: Or, Why Its Tempting to Live As If God Doesnt Exist (Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), ch.4: The Worldly Self at the Heart of Modern Culture, 181-236. 14

Sam Harris, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (London: Simon & Schuster, 2006). 15

Meredith B. McGuire, Religion: The Social Context (Belmont: Wadsworth, 1992).

9

we deny Gods sovereignty. In fact, this leads to fanaticism, or what Paul Tillich calls the

demonization of religion. So it turns out that traditional religion, as well as postmodern

thinking, may display both dangers and some positive points also. The strength of traditional

Christian theology is that it has a long inheritance from the Old and New Testaments, which

gives us divine revelation not available in the same way elsewhere. Its danger is that of building

a closed system. The strength of postmodern thought is that it is very fluid, suitable to a

globalizing world, where we now meet people and cultures with very different backgrounds. Its

weakness is that it may become lost in a web of relativities, with no centre but the subjective

self.

The understanding of a sovereign God who freely chooses to give us grace, may become

a new beginning for those imprisoned by immanent worldviews, whether premodern, modern,

or postmodern. The prior step before all of this is to decide if any divine revelation has been

given. If so, is it more than human projecting of wish fulfilment? Is divine revelation a true self-

disclosure by God? Does it allow for divine freedom and sovereignty? Does it give us a new path

in life? Does it allow us to ask questions? Does it not also question us? 16 This kind of approach

shows that theology or the life of faith, is really a way of living according to the old saying of

fides quaerens intellectum: faith seeking understanding. It may be that modern and

postmodern people are more prone to say that they are still seeking faith. But we may honour

the circle of faith seeking understanding, and understanding seeking faith. This is part of the

pilgrimage.

2. SIN (estrangement)

a). Sin in traditional theology means breaking the laws of God, going against his Word,

and doubting Gods promises. Postmodern approaches do not carry the traditional idea of a

historical fall into sin, nor do they necessarily have an idea of a personal God who speaks and

commands. Although we must add, the postmodern attitude often looks for the divine inner

voice. This fits with the list of characteristics we gave at the beginning of this article. Of course,

Socrates spoke of such a divine voice within, so this nothing new. The Old and New Testaments

refer to a personal hearing of the divine voice (whether in ones soul or through visions, etc.)

so this is always part of the walk of faith. Whereas the classical theological view often elevated

the printed Word above the Spirit, postmodern people do the opposite. This means that

traditional theology often became enmeshed in debates about fragmented biblical texts. But

the numbering is not part of the original manuscripts, so phrases should not be separated from

the whole story. Contemporary spirituality often reads the text or story, not so much for

developing theology, but for spiritual orientation. Which would be fine, if it were not so

16

See Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1991), ch.1 and 2.

10

individualistically reduced, as is often the case. While the many ways of reading the Word of

God are not directly sinful, they can be so distorted that they produce spiritual pride, self-

glorification or theological arrogance.

b). The contact point for postmodern thought with the idea of sin, is the experience of

estrangement. While this is not usually perceived as estrangement from God, there certainly is

in existentialist and other approaches a deep feeling of estrangement from our human

selfhood, or from our best goals, or from our neighbours. This theme is basic to Heidegger,

Sartre, Camus and others. It has always been expressed in literature (poetry, drama, novels)

and often in song. Estrangement became a dominant theme because of great and rapid

changes taking place in western societies between, let us say, the 19th and 20th century.

T.S.Eliots Wasteland and Picassos paintings expressed the fragmentation experienced after

the First World War and the lack of a unified vision for western society. We have said that

Nietzsche was already in many respects postmodern. But the relativity and fragmentation only

reached into wider society during the 20th century. Locality (local customs) began to count for

little in the face of globalisation. In this way, sin was disappearing from daily vocabulary; but

estrangement, expressed in terms of psychology and sociology, was gaining dominance. There

is today a new return of ethics. Newspapers often focus on complex choices for personal life

styles, for the environment, economy, politics and more. So sin, while not a very useable word

to the postmodern mind, is yet in discussion as human rights, freedom, war & peace,

destruction of the ecological system, and contemporary themes of rationalizing abusive power,

and other challenges which are very much in debate. Another way of saying this is that the

postmodern situation has taught us that we and our ideologies are very fallible.17

c). Attempting to evaluate this theme, we may say that sin, as estrangement, includes

the search for meaning and for God. Doubt towards God can be a consequence of sin. But

another kind of doubt is part of the process of faith seeking understanding and understanding

seeking faith. As Tillich says: Faith would not be faith but mystical union were it deprived of

the element of doubt within it.18 Since we have no complete mystical union, we say time and

again: Lord, I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief (Mark 9:24). Or, perhaps the

postmodern person says: Lord, I do not know what to believe; help me overcome my

estrangement. In premodern, modern, and postmodern times it remains true that:

...our lack of insight into our sin belongs to the essence of our sin. It is part of sins essence that

we hide it from ourselves. As best we can, and as long as it is in any way possible, we deny,

dispute, suppress, and justify it, until it does not look half so bad, or even seems advantageous.19

17

George Soros, The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror (New York: Public Affairs 2006). 18

Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, Volume III, Part IV: Life and the Spirit (London: Nisbet, 1968), 254. 19

Eberhard Busch, Drawn to Freedom: Christian Faith Today in Conversation with the Heidelberg Catechism (Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 69.

11

There is a connection here when we recognize that sin is self-justifying, and that the theme of

self-justifying ideologies is high on the postmodern agenda. Whether looked at personally or

collectively, the essence is the same. Self-justification closes the road to accepting divine

grace. Luthers question, How do I find a God of grace? has been raised time and again in

theological doctrine as well as piety. Without losing sight of this question, the contemporary

question of how we find God in a world of self-justifying powers, can also be fruitfully raised.

This is especially so when we see the contemporary paradox of talk about progress while at the

same time there is a series of global crises (war, poverty, terror, ecological stress, cultural

clashes) dominating the news.20 We should not remove the question of sin from our personal

responsibility; but neither should we remove this question from ideological structures and

movements. Personal sin and social injustice in a variety of forms are not disappearing.

Postmodernism closes some doors but opens other doors for talking about sin (and other

theological themes).

3. REDEEMER. Divine immanence (justification & sanctification)

We should not be surprised if both traditional and postmodern theology do not always

get it right when it comes to Christology. For the rich biblical names, titles, and images of Jesus

the Christ cannot be reduced to one correct formula.

The traditional Christmas carol, Once in Royal Davids City (words by C.F. Alexander),

show us the two basic sides of Christology, namely Christ in his majesty, and Jesus in his

servanthood:

He came down to earth from heaven,

Who is God and Lord of all,

And his shelter was a stable,

And his cradle was a stall;

With the poor, and mean, and lowly,

Lived on earth our Saviour holy.

Classical Christian doctrine and socially active faith adherents have often separated these two

sides. In any case, it has been pointed out that the Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox,

Reformation Churches, Baptists and Pentecostals, all have their image(s) of Christ. Or, we can

ask: which Christ? The Christ of piety, of dogma, the enthusiast social leader...?21 We shall not

20

Bob Goudzwaard, et.al., Hope In Troubled Times: A New Vision for Confronting Global Crises (Grand Rapids:

Baker Academic, 2007). 21

Hans Kng, On Being a Christian (New York: Doubleday, 1984), 126ff.

12

pursue this farther now, but we must be aware of the way images of Christ are sometimes used

in a reductive way.

Let us discuss this theme under the threefold office of Christ, just as a small way of

illustrating the theme.

Christ as Priest

a). The traditional view relates this to personal salvation, the Saviour suffered and made

a priestly sacrifice for me. Also: God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself

(2Corinthians 5:19).

b). The postmodern situation may have little connection to traditional idea of religious

sacrifice, but it knows about the need for becoming more human by means of grace - or

corresponding concepts, such as forgiveness and personal sacrifice for a better world. While

less open to the doctrine of salvation through a great High Priest, the postmodern personal

narrative orientation means that postmodern people may be open to stories about grace. That

is why recent theories about preaching have said that stories are important (but overused by

some pastors). It may be that the New Testament parables are exactly suited for this approach,

since Jesus taught by means of some impressive stories. The need for reconciliation is likely to

be experienced in postmodern times as a need to overcome alienation and loneliness. A further

postmodern theme that fits with the priestly task of Christ, is the idea that God suffers with us

c). Elements of the two approaches may be combined. Because our faith needs to be

expressed in the contemporary experiences of living culture, we need a living theology for this.

While the traditional symbolism is not part of our contemporary experience (we do not make

animal sacrifices as was done during the time of the Old Testament), the idea of a substitute is

still part of our experience. We are often rescued in smaller and larger ways by the intercession

of others who come along side and help. While classical theology concentrated more on how

we could be placed on Gods side (the victorious side), postmodern theology wants to know if

God is on our side (the estranged side) in a world full of suffering. Said differently: traditional

religion often says too quickly, God is on our side, while the contemporary search for faith

says, There is no God on our side.

Christ as Prophet

a). The Word of God must be preached, believed, applied. The Word of God comes in

many ways, and the final word comes in Christ who speaks and lives the divine truth. Grace

and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17). Jesus fulfils the role of the prophets, and as

more than a prophet, in his sacrificial life he can say I am the way, the truth, and the life.

b). The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls (Simon & Garfunkel).

Postmodern people are likely to say with Pilate, What is truth? And: truth must be my

truth. Kierkegaard made a central point of saying that truth is subjective. By which he meant

13

that it must be part of my experience, and not just information out there. Today this also

means that everyone can have their corner of truth and no one has the whole truth. Which is a

very positive gain as well as a recalcitrant enervating problem for postmodern pilgrims

(whether secularly or religiously defined and both aspects relate to each other).

c). The classical view on theological truth asks us to assent to doctrines. Experiential

theology asks for the relevance of the Word of God for our lives. Postmodern people help us

get beyond theology as doctrine; but postmodern people also need theological teachings.

Otherwise theology becomes poetry: nice, warm, and imaginative but not more than my idea

of the truth unless there is divine revelation which calls me out of my own circle into the

circle of fellowship with God and other people.

Christ as King

a). The kingship of Christ was traditionally seen as leading to a theocracy, meaning the

application of the rule of God by civic laws.

b). Postmodern people may not think highly of the state, but they do have high

expectations of justice. They may not think highly of the church, but they have high

expectations of respect for the neighbour. They have a lot to say about the use of power.

c). The idea of a theocracy is largely abandoned by the church in the late modern

situation. In a highly plural and postchristian situation the church should not try to impose a

Christian culture upon all of society. This is neither possible nor fruitful. At best we can work for

some theonomic influence. This means: using our pluralistic democratic means to bring the

values of faith into the discussion in the public arena, as well as developing Christian

organizations for expressing the social impact of the Gospel. Postmodern people are reluctant

to commit to a church, but they may be open to Jesus as Lord especially when the power of

this King is seen to be the power of grace. Grace does not first of all command us, but rather

invites us to be citizens of a new kingdom which witnesses to signs of heaven on earth.

Let us remark, that Christology is an awkward way of trying to answer the question:

Who do you say that I am? (Mark 8:9). This is a challenge at all times, and also for

postmodern thought, which tends to take the road of spirituality recommended long ago by

Plotinus (c.204-270AD). This spirituality relates to the One or the All, and is a rising toward

higher spiritual insights, values, and feelings. It does not always have an antenna for a personal

God who enters into human history, both as Lord and Servant. However, some see a

postmodern understanding of Jesus as very relevant now:

In some respects, Jesus fits postmodern sensibilities better than he does modern or premodern

ones. The premodern worldview locked Jesus in a box of static order and changelessness. ...Then

14

the modern worldview remade Jesus in its own image... Remarkably, Jesus anticipates and

embodies postmodern concerns...22

Among the postmodern characteristics Snyder finds in Jesus, are self-reference (but also

networking), irony, a mixing of styles, suspicion of power, freedom from general patterns,

open-ended, yet with a coherent purpose (what postmoderns call passion). All of these

qualities speak to the postmodern person.

4. SPIRIT. Guidance, Freedom, Hope

a). Traditonally the Spirit has been seen as sent by Christ to support and guide the

church in its proclamation of the Goodnews and its understanding of the doctrines of the

Christian faith. In the older historical churches the Spirit served the institution. In the modern

(basically postmodern) evangelical fellowship meetings, the Spirit took on a much more

personal and emotional role.

b). The postmodern situation is that of one world. The economic market in one part of

the world more and more affects other parts. Damage to the ecology seas, air, woods more

and more affects the rest of the world. There is also one humanity. We all have the same basic

needs for food and shelter, education, work, friendship and respect. Yet there are different

histories, races, cultures, religions. How shall we maintain particular identities and values while

more and more integrating this one world and one humanity? Is there a new age spirituality

that will be sufficient or better than the traditional religions? What spirit shall we follow? How

shall we measure truth and error? Who is the postmodern person if not the one who among

multimedia connections is restlessly zapping and clicking? Tillich says: The search for identity

which is a genuine problem of the present generation is actually the search for the Spiritual

Presence... The self which has found its identity is the self of the one who is accepted as a

unity in spite of his disunity.23 Of course, Augustine already said that he realized that he was a

restless one until he found God had accepted him. So the restlessness is evident in

premodern, modern, and postmodern ways different according to their own paradigms.

c). Evaluation: All of this points to the need for spiritual healing through acceptance,

which theologically is the action of divine grace. This also points to the need for a compass for

guidance. The postmodern person often lives like a tourist, without long term commitments:

what used to be permanent, for example, marriage or church loyalty or life-long employment

at the same job, are becoming rarities. But when commitments are made today, these can also

become a new pilgrimage in a religious sense.24 This is the role of the Holy Spirit. And so we

22

Snyder, 297ff. 23

Tillich, vol.III, 276. 24

Bauman, ch.3, 72ff.

15

arrive at the fruit of the Spirit which can be identified as ...love, joy, peace, patience,

kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control... Galatians 5:22). Tillich defines

the essence of true religion as the Spiritual Presence. He devotes many thoughts to this in his

systematic theology lectures but we have room here to refer to a only a few of his

statements.25 But they are rewarding to think about. He says that the New Being in Jesus Christ

creates a new Spiritual Community. The Spiritual Presence is found in the Spiritual Community,

that is, the church as body of Christ, in specific ways. But the Spiritual Presence is also found in

all of humanity in latent and manifest ways. Tillich draws on the event of Pentecost to

characterise the Spiritual Community. These characteristics are: i) ecstacy (being drawn out of

oneself); ii) faith; iii) mutual service, love; iv) unity; v) mission desire to spread the Goodnews.

Yet the Spiritual Presence, even in the church, is fragmentary, ambiguous, and even sometimes

demonized into its opposite. But what about the latent and manifest Spiritual Presence in the

world? Tillich says that the Spiritual Presence must always be (eventually) connected to Christ

as the centre of divine revelation, but wherever we find the Spirit of God at work producing the

fruit of the Spirit, we may speak at least of latent Spiritual Presence. Even people and

movements estranged and hostile toward the church may hold a valuable corrective to errors in

the church. Sometimes God uses these to admonish the church. This is very relevant in the

plural situation of postmodernity.

IV. Conclusion

I would like to finish this article with two points first of all about relativism, and

secondly about Jesus as the Christ.

a.) Philosophy of foundations and applications

Postmodernism believes that we must deconstruct all standpoints as not much more

than viewpoints. But this would prevent us from evaluating standpoints, because they are by

this definition only a view on things and not the view. Indeed, if all standpoints have no sure

foundation, then we have no way of measuring their truth (in the sense of corresponding to

reality). But ironically at this point we need to deconstruct postmodernism. For it is in danger of

not distinguishing between foundational, ontically given objective realities and subjective,

historically contingent applications. Tillich says that the foundation of religion as ...the

revelatory and saving manifestation of the Spiritual Presence is always what it is....26 What

changes is the human receptivity of this foundational revelatory experience. He says this is

also true of art, ethics, philosophy and so forth. I like to distinguish between given norms and

historical forms. So a philosophy of ontological structures will help us avoid the idea that

25

Tillich, vol.II, 159ff. 26

Tillich, 358f.

16

everything is a human construction (whether by the mind or by social settings). However, it is

true that we do not know reality in an absolute, fully objective way. All our knowing is via the

human self, which includes our mind, heart, experience and social milieu. Postmodernism

rightly deconstructs human ideologies and prejudices. But if it wants to deconstruct all

normativity, it runs into an antinomy: if there are no foundational givens, then we lose all

common understandings and end in a fragmented pastiche of solipsistic expressions, meaning

only what we want to make them say.

b) Theology

The natural person does not understand things that come from Gods Spirit

(1Corinthians 2:14), so whether premodern, modern, or postmodern, all may be equally far

from God, each in their own way. Premodernity strays into magic and the appeasement of

many gods. Modernity places trust in human achievements via science and technology and

turns modern ideologies into idols. Postmodernity wanders into a labyrinth of choices which

leave us less certain about everything. It asks what we can find after the end of ideologies

(though these are not at all ended). It asks if there is anything left after we deconstruct the

grand pictures. These questions must be continually raised.27 The theme of fallibility and the

failure of ideologies was a central motif in Madachs drama (1860), The Tragedy of Man.28 We

know that all eras of humankind and cultural projects seek ways of self-salvation, whether we

look for a theory of everything, or whether we say everything is only a point of view. One of

the functions of faith in God is that this breaks through the imprisonment of immanence.

Whether the imprisonment of immanence is premodern, modern, or postmodern, it remains an

imprisonment. Faith opens up a skylight window. The Word of God gives us a specific focus

(which finally is Christ).

Indeed, what about the finality of Jesus as the Christ?29 How does this relate to other

ways of seeking faith in God? If we hold to the fact that there is no other name (Act 4:12) as

well as the fact that God was in Christ reconciling the world through grace, then there is room

for many methods of communication which cannot be reduced to preaching (monologue).

Many ways have been proposed for relating faith in Christ (biblical revelation) to other

religions:

1) Some say we need clear writings and conversations of an apologetic nature,

explaining what we believe.

2) Others say that all steps of faith, according to the light received, are preparations to

find Christ (Augustine could say he eventually found Christ via the route of

27

David Walsh, After Ideology: Recovering the Spiritual Foundations of Freedom (Washington: Catholic University

of America Press, 1995). 28

Imre Madch, The Tragedy of Man (Budapest: Corvina, 1988). 29

Migliore, 161ff.

17

Mani and Plato).

3) Some, such as Rahner, talk about anonymous Christians, meaning those who in

practice share the values of faith without (yet) knowing Christ.

4) Many emphasize the importance of dialogue:

a) in which various faith positions listen to each other, seeking correlations

(Tillich);

b) correcting each others historical errors and acting as a critical catalyst

(Kng) to bring out what is best in each; and

c) entering dialogue as an expression of Christian love (Moltmann) by accepting

others, being vulnerable ourselves, and sharing our Goodnews.

It is not so easy to find a balance between overstrict self-justifying views on faith, and a

lenient acceptance of others views which may lose sight of the specific glory of grace through

Jesus Christ. So we need to affirm that faith in Christ creates such a Spiritual Presence that we

can freely and joyfully share the Goodnews, that Jesus is Lord, with others in order that they

too may find Christ as the skylight revealing the love of God most completely.

Snyder ends his study by saying that a worldstory provides us with more than a

worldview. The story of God coming into this world through Jesus Christ answers the criteria for

a good worldstory, which should be comprehensive, historical, personal and transforming for

society.30 Postmodern people need to ask themselves, when they see the failure of worldviews

(especially ideologies), if there is a worldstory which gives integral meaning to our lives. But

havent all grand stories failed? The question is very valid. Reality impinges upon us to give an

answer. No one has all the perfect answers. But some views are better grounded than other

views.

30

Snyder, 278ff;