Filed under: Booknotes, Random Musings, Theology, World Christianity | Tags: Global Dictionary of Theology, Heresy, Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen
I recently enrolled in a Systematic Theology class taught by Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen. Many of the reading requirements for the course are found in the Global Dictionary of Theology (a dictionary for which Kärkkäinen is a co-editor). I foresee this being a useful resource as I continue to explore the emergence of theology beyond the West. This is no doubt a significant work for the Church. Whether a student or not, for those interested in Christian theology, the Global Dictionary of Theology will prove helpful and enriching.
As for some of my reflections on an article in GDT titled, Heresy…
The notion of heresy in the context of theological debate and/or conversation almost always results in a heated discourse fueled by entitlement and claims to right thinking. In part, this is due to the way contemporary theology continues to treat strands of orthodox belief as fixed and universally applicable. We treat the historical developments of theology (Christology, Soteriology, etc.) as a closed book – a conversation that took place in an historical vacuum – leaving little room to consider the impact of the contextual matrix from which they emerged. While flexibility and grace are often given to the emergence and evolution of doctrine, there are “fundamental tenets” of the gospel that are treated as if etched in stone. And therein lies the confusion. Exactly which fundamental tenets must take precedence in determining orthodox belief? And furthermore, who is given the authority to make such judgments?
Traditionally, Christians have relied on the historical developments of theology pertaining to the person and work of Jesus Christ during the early church period, culminating in the formulation set forth by the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century. But even these developments are rooted in an understanding of Christ that reflects a clash between the Greek/Hellenistic culture of Antioch and the Hebrew/Judaic culture of Alexandria. Implying a contextual framework, however, does not discount the work of the Holy Spirit in history, but rather reframes the breath of the triune God as that which encounters our subjectivity in context, revealing truth through a process of growth and transformation. Simply put, the historical developments of orthodox Christian belief, even pertaining to the person and work of Jesus Christ, are not formulas to be passed from one culture to the next. Instead, they deserve to be revered as testimonies to the work of God in salvation history, inspiring us to continue developing theological formulations for our day that are rooted in divine revelation and the fellowship of God’s people.
