Theology versus Praxis?

Joe came back from the birth of his son with both barrels blasting. His latest post on Does Theology Make A Difference? is direct and to the point:

I feel that in our profession that we can become enamored with learning about God but fail to meet him in the way. I remember once studying for a private pilot’s license – memorizing many charts, facts, and numbers. Yet when it came time to actually fly the plane I was quite unprepared. Can it be that we have become as Festus said of Paul, “While he was thus defending himself Festus burst out, "You are raving, Paul! All your learning has driven you mad!” (Acts 26:24)?

It could be that we don’t hear about theological praxis because it does not attract visitors to our blogs. Maybe we don’t want to share what we are doing simply because we would seem to be bragging. Yet I somehow do not think that is the case. I know from past experiences that words have been exchanged on numerous blogs which we would have been recalcitrant to exchange on the Lord’s Day – in the presence of our Brethren. Can the same tongue curse men and love God? I think not.

Is it any wonder that people want to be elsewhere on church days if all of our theological learning cannot evoke empathy for our fellow man/woman even within the blogsphere? I was told by my systematic theology professor, Millard Erickson, that Barth took almost every Saturday to minister somehow to those in less fortunate circumstances than himself. Could that be true? Could it be true that his theology drove him to minister to the “least of these my brothers and sisters?”

<idle musing>

There is a grave disconnect in many ways. The problem, as I see it, is that we have disconnected two vital aspects of Christianity: the experiential and the intellectual/theological. So, we end up with either a "spiritual experience" with no sound foundations or a dry intellectual assent with no power to transform lives. The first results in cults, do-it-yourself spirituality or emotionalism. Experience for the sake of experience. No change in lives, no holiness, just experience for the sake of a thrill.

The second results in doubt that there really is a loving, just and personal (as in personality versus inanimate power) God. We then justify our lack of power by theologizing and cessationizing (is that a word?) scripture. After all, if we don't experience it, it must be gone or never was, right? Don't see people healed? Must be because it doesn't happen anymore, or never did. We are the measure by which we judge everything—and the serpent slithers up beside us and whispers, "You are gods." And we joyfully believe it. Paul says in I Corinthians that when he comes he will see the power of those who are big talkers, not what they can say.

I had a theology professor who used to say that his goal was to make every pastor a theologian and every theologian a soul winner. Noble goal, but only possible if there is an experiential connection with the theological reflection. That is one reason I like the Wesleyan tradition, the Wesleys were both strong on experiencing God, but they built a strong intellectual and theological framework within which they placed that experience.

<idle musing>