[This is going to be a bit of a demanding read for some…]
There’s a very provocative set of posts, called Bourgeoisie and the Frustrations of Theology, over at Richard Beck's Experimental Theology. Here’s a taster, taken from the first of three posts so far…
Behind just about every theological call for community… or Trinity or anti-Empire ethics sits the problem of the bourgeoisie. In these posts I'd like to explain how the bourgeoisie are the rock theology is banging its head against…
Behind every call for church to be "community" or a reclaiming of the "Trinity" or for an ontology of "being as communion" sits a background assumption. Community, Trinity, and "being as communion" are preached over against a prevailing norm. And that norm is the Western notion of identity and personhood.
As most are aware, the Western notion of personhood stresses autonomy, individualism, and interiority. This view of the self is relatively new and many theologians have noted its pernicious impact upon both theology and the life of the church. The recommendation is to reclaim a more ancient and more healthy notion of self, where people are not isolated individuals but persons who gain identity through communion with others. For example, God's very being is defined communally. Thus, the Western notion of selfhood flies in the face of the very fabric of existence.
The point is, almost every pernicious spiritual practice we see today has its root in a notion of selfhood that prioritizes individualism over [relatedness], autonomy over interdependence, and interiority over community. So the question is: If this Western notion of identity is so bad where did it come from? And why is the Western identity so hard to exchange if such better options are available?…
...[Plato and (especially) Augustine of Hippo are the historical causes, he argues]...
...The question theology must ask is: Can the bourgeois ethic be replaced with anything of comparable effectiveness?
Christian and Marxist revolutions are often being preached at the bourgeoisie. But it is very unclear what the bourgeoisie are to do on Monday morning if they are to pay the rent. So they get up and go back to work. And that is the root dilemma of modern theology. People go back to work. If you want to change this, to offer a true alternative, you need to carve out a new mode of living, one not contingent upon participating in a bourgeois career. Few people lambasting the bourgeois identity actually make an offer of this kind. A few cults do.
So in the vacuum of this offer people head to work on Monday morning. And if they go back to work, church life is going to have to fit in around the edges of bourgeoisie existence. Church life or missional living is always going to be fighting over the scraps of what is left over from the bourgeois work week....
This coheres well with what I understand of current church practice and teaching, at least in my own setting. Richard Beck’s argument is that it is not good enough to speak about community and 'joined up' living, while people are still choosing, or needing, to live out an inherited individualist, technologically networked, lifestyle, right down to the roots of their very daily earning practices.
Plenty to think about here. More, perhaps, on this in due course…
Recent Comments