What is theology? Today
we would define “Theology” this way: it is how we understand and
explain our faith. Theology is important for us, even if we don't
study it. Why? Because it shapes our understanding of our faith, our
practice
and
the pastoral mission of the Church at each period in history. In
fact, without being a real person (like the Pope), theology bears a
great responsibility in the Church.
The Magisterium of the
Church (the teaching of the Pope and the Bishops united with him) is
in its
turn shaped by theology, by a certain historical way of “doing
theology”. Of course the Magisterium has the authority to change,
modify, improve the way we do theology, but at
the
same time the Magisterium is the fruit of a certain period in
history, a certain place, a certain school or way of doing Theology.
So it
is as
well very influenced by it. That two ways relationship (influencing
and being influenced) between the Magisterium and Theology is
important and
should be noted.
Awareness
In
each period of history,
the Church practises theology in a different way, but if you ask
people and theologians, and even the Magisterium at that time: “are
you aware that you could do things differently?”, they would be
very surprised and shocked, because each generation thinks that hers
is the
only way to do things. But of course, it goes without saying that
scholars would never question that fact because it is obvious.
Space and Time
Culture is bound by
time
and space. Culture is like the soil on which the Seed of the Gospel
falls. It determines the outcome even if the Seed is the same. Our
way of doing theology is specific to a certain time in history. For
instance, we do not do theology as
we did 200
years ago, or during medieval times, or during the first six
centuries.
Space as well shapes theology: the Western way of doing theology
(Latin Fathers'
tradition)
is different from the Eastern way of doing it (Greek Fathers'
tradition). Within the West and the East we have more differences as
well. Some would be surprised by this diversity, but it is important
to see it not like a threat but rather as an important source
of richness.
John Paul II's call to breathe
with
both lungs (western and eastern traditions) still resonates in our
ears as a duty for the theologian, or better said an improvement to
his or her methodology and tools.
Prophetical
Theology
In the history of the
Church, there is another distinction as well in the way of doing
theology, which is: Priestly
and Prophetical
Theology.
These words come from the actual two branches of the Church: the
Priestly
Branch (the Parish, the Diocese) and the Prophetical
Branch (the monasteries, religious life,...) and their way of
understanding and practising theology. Prophetical
Theology
is not that of a common expression, in fact we are more used to
another one: Monastic
Theology.
Today, “monastic
theology” is sort of non-existent.
It has
been swallowed by “Priestly Theology”, to the point that we only
have the
latter
one. If you ask any theologian: what about “monastic theology”?,
or better still
“prophetical
theology”, he/she will take a long time, remaining silent,
wondering: “what does he exactly mean by that expression?”
Lead by, or
Leading?
As you can
see,
all these types/ways of doing theology are mainly influenced by the
soil, the human side of the Seed-Soil interaction/alchemy;
but it is often happening unconsciously. Only few theologians - often
saints - would act and influence positively the way we do theology.
We end up ninety-nine
per cent of
the time by being passively lead by the actual way of doing theology,
not questioning it, rather than trying to question it and improve it.
The branch of theology that is in charge of that one
per cent of work
is called “Fundamental Theology”.
Today's Needs
What about today's soil
and its needs (the human being)? If you analyse the psychology of the
human being before the second world war and after the second world
war, including the explosion of the sixties and the seventies, you'll
notice that people and
their
needs are different. Let me take an example to get myself across.
Before, people would be won by the argument of authority, which means
that people would believe or do something that is morally good not
firstly
because
they are convinced of it but firstly
because
God said so, or the Church said so. On the other hand, today, people
would first want to understand in order to get the gist of it and
become convinced of it, and then
would
need to try it and see, by experience, if it is good or not.
I am not addressing
right now the characteristics of the actual youth, but just taking an
older comparison that people of an
older
age would relate to. Today we have other problems and other needs. By
the way, the
above-mentioned “sixties
way” (let us call it like this) is not totally new, it is just that
a
greater stress is put on it. The dialogue between Jesus and the
Samaritan lady in John 4 is very close to this experiential way of
doing things.
Coming back to the
changes of recent decades and the “new” needs that appear to have
priority,
these are
showing greater depths and therefore requirements in the modern mind.
I can compare it with the normal growth of the human being: before
adolescence, and during adolescence. Adolescence is a crisis, but a
crisis of growth, therefore it is a positive crisis. What happens in
the growth/development of the human being? The body develops and with
it new dimensions in the faculties of the soul, the mind, the will.
The adolescent is set to start to
explore
the world, his needs are growing. You can't treat a fifteen-year-old
as you
treated him when he was ten
years
old. You need to meet the need of the new development of his
faculties, of this new depth that is appearing in him. The
development in the West that occurred after World War II generated a
similar “crisis of growth”. People's mind, culture, way of doing
things before WWII and after it, especially after the 60s-70s crisis
of growth are different. Phislosophy and Theology (the way of doing
them) are consequently influenced by that cultural change. The Soil
changes, the outcome changes.
If you have to explain
faith to a ten-year-old,
you'd do it one
way,
but to a twenty-one-year-old,
you'll need different arguments, ways, content. Has
the
theology you are using changed?
No, it has
not,
however
it
just has
to be
more detailed, appealing to a wider mind and culture, new challenges,
new threats. For instance, the introduction of Psychology, modern
Philosophies for instance has been a serious challenge for Philosophy
and Theology in the past decades. Many questions rose. Let us just
take an emblematic one: “what about Christ's consciousness: was He,
in his human nature, aware that he was God? Did his
perception/consciousness grow along with his age?” This is one of
the most challenging questions theology has to face. If you look deep
in it you'll find that his question has repercussions on many other
questions, like for instance: once we get closer to the union with
God, how does it feel? Well this question and many others appeared
just recently (60s-70s), because of the changes, the needs, the
developments of new sciences,... Again, the “adolescent” mind is
not like the “ten-year-old”.
Asymmetrical
education
We need as well to
notice the asymmetrical development today in the Christian
adult:
he or she usually has had some higher level education, he or she has
read
many books, and is constantly bombarded by tens of new thoughts every
day, coming from the multiple media we have. It is true as well that
the actual “culture” (I put it in
quotations on purpose)
is as well, in many ways rather superficial, favouring more the
rapid, summarised, saleable
information
than the deep, transformative, time/energy consuming formation.
Today,
this
of course is narrowing the windows of any serious/deep input in
Christian Adult Formation. In this sense we are going (lead by our
culture) through the creation of a very dangerous gap that could
prevent us from having any connection with the rich past. We are
getting more and more isolated from the past. And there is no
Christianity without a
past,
without relating to the Living Stream of the Spiritual Tradition. We
are not meant to redefine or reinvent Christianity
at
each generation, but
rather we
are invited to receive a living Gift, develop it and hand
it to
the following generation. Breaking the momentum as we have
been doing in
these last decades is too dangerous, because it will cost us 50 to
100 years to rebuild, rediscover, and reconnect with the Living
Stream.
Urgent Need
for
a Prophetical Theology
Prophetical Theology, or
formerly “Monastic Theology” is a theology that has specific
characteristics: it is focused on the experience of the Risen Lord in
the Holy Spirit, driven by the “call for holiness” (or so called
“second conversion”).
It offers
the traditional and proven tools/means that help us grow in the
experience of Jesus, in order to reach the fullness of Love. It is
the “theology of the saints”, the “theology of holiness”. Of
course
it
is rather
a contemplative
theology,
where experience, science and discernment are not dislocated but work
together, harmoniously. This theology is an introduction to the
Mystery of God, and not only a distant reflection on it. It is a
theology that is touched by God, by the Holy Spirit and is therefore
humbled and guided by Him.
It is not the basic
theology (that would be the Priestly Theology, which is the common
one we have in the west) but
is
rather a more developed one, focused on Jesus'
personal
call to each one of us, at a certain point in our life. This theology
is urgently needed.
Contemplative
Theology
Prophetical Theology is
Contemplative Theology, in the sense that it forms the student, and
introduces him/her into a contemplative state where Theology is not
just a mere intellectual object/concept but a living Being (God,
Jesus, the Holy Spirit) with whom one enters in a personal
relationship, a Being that becomes an experience and an experience
that has stages, development, until it reaches its fullness.
For the Fathers of the
Church in the early centuries, “Theology” meant: to be in the
Son, Contemplating the Father and Loving Him through the Holy Spirit.
It was the full experience of God, and not a discourse on God, or an
intellectual knowledge. The office of the Theologian was to
contemplate God, Loving Him. The office of Theology was to teach how
to reach that contemplation of God, how to have this experience of
the Risen Lord.
St John The Theologian |
Very few were named “Theologians”, actually only one initially: St John. Not that St Paul wasn't a Theologian, but St John the Evangelist embodied the Theologian. In his Gospel one could see the height of his contemplation of Jesus. One could say that St John's Gospel was considered the archetype of the book of any Theologian. His School
taught us what is to be a Theologian and how to become one.
(to be continued...)
No comments:
Post a Comment