Yeah, haven’t had much time to be about the blog lately. Mary Beth worked three days this week, so it was Clark and me for those three days . . . long days, but we had a good time. He’s doing great. He went to the doctor on Tuesday and got his first shots. He did great. He slept all day yesterday, which was a big change. His grandparents from Lewisburg are in town for the weekend, so that’s nice he gets to see them. They haven’t seen his since he was born.
In other aspects of theological conversation, I’ve had a little time to plod on. Last Thursday night the Metz family attended a lecture at the Josephinium Pontifical college here in Columbus. The Theological Consortium of Greater Columbus has hired a new faculty member to teach classes in the area of world religions and their relationship to Christianity. It was interesting. His lecture was entitled, “Is there Common Ground in a Multireligious World?” I might see if I can sit in on a class some day. He was interesting. (Can’t remember his name).
I also have been plodding on in Weber’s Younger Evangelicals. Lots of books I need to get reading on, but with Clark, not much reading has been happening. I read the chapter about apologetics yesterday. Very interesting. Brings up the shift to a post-foundational world. I am very intrigued by this subject matter. I was first introduced to it theologically a few years ago by Stan Grenz and John Franke’s book Beyond Foundationalism. Now there is an Eat Your Wheaties book. This whole idea of postfoundationalism helps me understand the challenges and frustrations I face in Churches of Christ. No group is more rooted in foundationalism that us. And foundationalism is more that a mere heremenuetical preference, but an entire philosophical outlook. When differences of heremebneutical preference surface, they are at least playing on the same playing field, but when differences of philosophies arise and worldviews differ, I do not know how to communiate across them. People listen to me and think I am radical, different, liberal, whatever. But seldom do I ever let all that I am thinking let fly. Hardly do I ever let anyone know what I am really thinking. I have to keep that all inside or I will totally blow them away. We get onto issues like women in ministry . . . and that for me is a “let’s move on issue.” There are bigger fishes to fry. There are more significant questions to delve into . The uniqueness of Christ in a pluralistic society is one big one. I’m glad I don’t often have conversations in this realm or I would really get a bad label.
Basically Weber has made me realize that I need to expand my ability to communicate across the foundationalistic divide. Most of the people I work with, understand the world foundationally. They see ration and logic as the cornerstones of faith. Enlightenment thinking is at their heart and soul. When experientail dimensions enter the conversation, they really begin to become bug-eyed. I must work to bridge this gap. I like Weber’s summary that younger evangelicals look at the world from a Christian perspective. They see no reason to “prove” the “truth” of Chrisitanity. They accept it as a given. It is the best way to view the world. If we lived that way, maybe others would be more impressed with that than our “proofs.”
The challenge rages on in my mind. Hopefully God will reveal something helpful to me at some point. Until then, I’m stuck waging theoretically through philosophical and ethereal b.s. Where I’ll end up, no one knows.