A Postmodern in a Modern School
Growing up in Nova Scotia, Canada was a postmodern experience. Last night as I was reflecting on some of the experiences that happened at FHU, I realized what the problem was. Sometimes at school I am laughed at, make fun of, called out, and labeled a liberal. I started to realize the problem. Theologically I am in line with the conservative values in the church, but I am a functional postmodern. I mean by this that I believe that you can know truth, but the methodology I use in discovering truth is different than some with a modern mindset. At FHU I always get in trouble with the professors because in good postmodern fashion I reject authority. There is no part of me that desires to believe a truth just because a professor told me that it is true. Also, as the professors are arguing for this truth in a logical fashion, I am feeling through the truth. How does this feel is a legitimate concern to me. Does it seem fair, does it flow with the spirit of Christ? Finally, when it comes to some inferences from the Word, I seem to fight the logic of saying I am completely correct on this reasoning from the text. I see too much fallibility in myself to think that I can always reason perfectly. At FHU sometimes I feel that everyone thinks I am a liberal, but typically we agree on most doctrines, it is just that I take the back roads and the professors and some of the students are driving on the interstates. We both get to the same destination, I just take the postmodern route and some take the modern way.
Related posts:
- Modern or Postmodern Interpretation
- The Need for Navigators in Post-Modern Times-4
- Heading to Graduate School
- The Need for Navigators in Post-Modern Times–1
- The Need for Navigators in Post-Modern Times–3
About The Author
I think you may very well have identified the difficulty Matthew. Speaking as a modernist and as a friend I must say that the position you are claiming to hold to makes very little sense to me. For example, how can one hold to the “conservative values of the church” and believe them to be universally applicable if there are no universals? How can one “in good postmodern fashion reject authority” and yet believe that Jesus is one who has been given “all authority in heaven and on earth?” To myself (and most of your classmates and teachers I imagine) this positions seem inconsistent.
Additionally, your humility is admirable in acknowledging that you are not capable of “always reasoning perfectly.” But can it genuinely be believed that we are any more capable of “feeling” through an issue perfectly?
I have starred this post in Google Reader. Your insights are quite revealing.
Why should any modernist be threatened by postmodernism? If they hold the truth, will postmodernism not go the way of many other philosophies of days gone by? Argumentation never requires name-calling nor labeling. It is much better left to logic (of which you don’t have any as a pomo- HA!) to seek the truth as closely as we can. I see no reason for a dialogue. In fact, I fear the church may lose an entire generation if there isn’t at least SOME dialogue on pomo.
My two cents.
In the above post, I meant to say “I see no reason why there CAN’T be a dialogue (between mo and pomo).”
Serge,
Where did Matthew say there are no “unversals”? I also think it is a VERY BIG leap to associate the postmodern questioning of human authorities as also a rejection of Jesus’ authority. Remeber that even though there are some dangers associated with postmodern thinking, there are just as many dangers to be found in modern thinking. Your statement associating the rejection of human authorities as leading to the rejection of Jesus’ authority reveals one of the problems with modern thinking. That’s my 2 cents.
Grace and peace,
Rex
Ithaca Church of Christ
Ithaca, NY
Serge, good to see you today. I never got to check the blog before school, so I would have just talked with you about this. And Serge you are a friend to me too. You are someone I love having class with because you challenge me to be a better and logic man. Thank you for your ministry and love towards me. Let me quickly answer a few of this seemingly “inconsistency.” First of all, I do not reject universals, as I noted, I am certainly not a postmodern in the fullest sense. I believer you can know truth and there is absolute truth. Also, as for rejecting what a professor will say, this is the tendency of the postmodern. The first response is the question. Also, Serge there is a big, huge, difference between rejecting what a professor will teach and what Jesus taught. Jesus was perfect, the teachers are not which has been shown a few times in classes together. It is not that I will not accept a teachers position, but I must first study the issue out for myself. Serge I hope next semester we are in the same class together again my friend. And my friend, you do not get it, because you are the master logician. You know me by now, and I am not.
Michael, thank you for your balanced perspective on this issue. I would love for you to write more on this in your blog.
I would disagree with the analysis. First you have a Christian and then a “restoration” birth right to THINK FOR YOURSELF. Second I don’t think you reject authority. You ask for evidence. This in fact is a very “modern” exercise. In a “pre-modern” world “appeal to authority” was expected. Authority of the pope, church … and professor. Modernism came along and rejected, not the authority, but the APPEAL to authority. Authority was granted to evidence.
If the “authority” is merely your prof or some one else then it might as well be the pope or some cult. If the “authority” is a questionable inference then one merely rejects questionable reasoning.
As for claiming to be a “modernist” perhaps it is not understood what one is claiming. I am not a modernist and have no desire to be one.
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Logic and reason are used all through the scriptures, especially in the teachings of Jesus and Paul. If we follow Christ, we will be friends of logic and reason.
I think what you may be describing is the fear that “traditionalists” may have towards independent reasoning that is not based on “what we’ve always done,” but on what the text actually says.
This is a thought provoking blog. I’ll try to check it out more! Thanks
Matthew, truthfully, if you think for yourself you will end up at some different destinations than your professors, their parrots, and those who know all the answers. At the end of the day I’ll take someone who knows they do not know everything over someone who can’t see the conclusion for the propositions. Keep thinking, friend, for we are inhabited by a Spirit who will always lead us closer to the heart of the Father.
Matthew said: “Sometimes at school I am laughed at, made fun of, called out, and labeled a liberal.”
The fact that you receive this treatment in a graduate-level program for ministers says more about the problems in the modern church than any dispute about methodologies. Never apologize for thinking for yourself; in doing so you make yourself a better believer and a better minister.
Sometimes it seems that I am laughed at because I just do not see the “truth” of what the professor is saying. But I truly care about what is right. I never argue out of the desire to be right, but for what is right.
In an earlier post you mentioned not being able to hear the voice of God except in scriptures. Very frequently the uneasy feeling (or it might be a feeling of affirmation) we have in our hearts is God’s spirit telling us what we need to know. Also concerning authority, if you recall, Jesus instructed the disciples not to put themselves over another and not to put anyone between themselves and God. He spoke out against the teachings of the Pharasees and the scribes warning that anything they taught should be checked against God’s internal compass. Jesus is the infallible Word of God that came to make the scripture perfect by incorporating it into our hearts. If we use nothing more than logic in making decisions why do we seek God’s wisdom in the first place?