It is often in modern discourse when it comes to our religious tradition that we find ourselves at odds with what our church teaches. Such matter of occurrences is normal, and as it matter of fact, I recommend a good faith crisis to grow. Nevertheless, we often have our favorite politicians, athletes, actors, singers, philosophers… but should we have a favorite theologian? The matter of fact is that religion is not some sort of self-relationship, but rather a communal relationship (at least Christian speaking). The relationship of a Christian is ultimate with God, but it also it’s secondary with the Church and thus not a theologian.
The self-tradition might be more common for us living in the first world countries of the west. We have been moved to believe in some sort of cultural aspect such as the American dream. We are called to be self-made and self-independent. The post-modern western culture especially focuses on the individual good rather than the communal good. The relationship of the person to the community is often emphasized rather than the relationship of the community to the unity of the family. It is not to amaze us then that people reflect these values upon their faith system because they feel the need to be safe.
The main problem with the self-tradition is that it will slowly lead us to realize no Church fits us. This is because we will slowly realize that what we want is not what the Church wants for us. There are many aspects which a person can take upon such occurrences. The person can church-shop, but eventually, they will just continue to leave until there is no church for them left. The other option it’s to straight go into a deconstruction of faith that will lead them to no longer need the self-tradition because their faith would no longer exist. In either occurrence, both cases of the self-tradition it’s assured to lead towards complete spiritual suicide… a literal hell.
The self-tradition often begins with our favorite theologians. We start to categorize our faith upon them. Then without realizing it, we begin to reflect their personal exegesis upon all texts so we can reflect the conclusion that we desire. I by no means state that one should not read theologians; however I do mean to state that we should not have only one favorite theologian. The healthiest walk is to have a multitude of theologians to read, study, and appreciate (or at least understand) multiple traditions to challenge oneself. One should even explore the writer that we dislike. But, more importantly, remember theology reflects the inner prayer life. If the inner prayer life is focused on the shortcoming of others, then we will have a horrible theology. This remains true even if the focus on others because we are concerned with their salvation. The focus can be positive or negative but we remain in danger of even self-worship. We elevate the opinion we hold as true, and can no longer take any valid criticism. This is a result of the self-tradition we imposed via our favorite theologian. That one theologian, as great as he or she can be, the theologian will always remain a solo voice in the wilderness of the world.
The solo voice of the theologian remains by itself. A man alone cannot fight a citadel, but a whole tribe can. The unity of multiple traditions and voices it’s what the Church is. The Church attracts the best of the minds to discourse, dialogue, and sometimes to annoy everyone else, but there is something key here. The Church alone brings us the balance of all traditions and thus focuses on the middle path which is the path of God. When we read the world through our favorite theologians, we become easily detached from other opinions. Eventually, we will become defensive and one day we will walk away from the truth thinking we are walking towards it. No human-inspired book is infallible, and no human thought can be perfect. By shattering the possibility of self-tradition, we are already walking towards the best possibility, communal love.
Comments