Discussion platform - Theological reflection on the Bible, crisis and catastrophe
The theme of the 2008 Global Platform is The Bible, Chaos and Catastrophe.
This discussion platform is an opportunity to participate through sharing theological reflection on the use made of the Bible in three presenting issues - Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS - and responding to what others have posted.
The views expressed in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policy of the World Council of Churches.
Rudolf H. Pasaribu seems to take issue with the approach we have taken to the theme. In section 2.2.2 of his paper, he argues that disaster comes from God.
How do you react to that and his use of the Bible to make his point?
Clare Amos, a member of the Global Platform Core Group, gave this lecture in 2002. How do you respond to her Biblical interpretation? What questions does it raise about the way the Bible can condition our response to contemporary situations?
Attached File: Text__Tribulation_and_Testimony__the_Bible_in_the_context_of_the_Middle_East.pdfThe attached paper sets out the thinking behind the Global Platform and describes how it is organised.
The Faith and Order text A Treasure in Earthen Vessels: An Instrument for an Ecumenical Reflection on Hermeneutics offers us some hermeneutical foundations. It can be found at www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-commissions/faith-and-order-commission/iv-interpretation-the-meaning-of-our-words-and-symbols/a-treasure-in-earthen-vessels-an-instrument-for-an-ecumenical-reflection-on-hermeneutics/a-treasure-in-earthen-vessels-an-instrument-for-an-ecumenical-reflection-on-hermeneutics.html
The 2008 theme for the WCC Global Platform on theological reflection and analysis is theological reflection on The Bible, Crisis and Catastrophe. We invite your participation in the process and ask you to put us in contact with those already involved in doing theological reflection relating to the theme.
Theological reflection on The Bible, Crisis and Catastrophe was chosen by the Global Platform Core Group for a variety of reasons. One of the things we learnt from the 2007 Global Platform process was that simply adding Biblical texts to social/political/economic analysis was not an adequate way of doing theological reflection on the issue. However, the main motivation was the recognition that in diverse issues such as Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS, the Bible has been used by some Christians to deepen or deny problems. At the same time, Christians who are working for peace and justice in the Middle East and for changes in individual and collective attitudes and behaviour in response to climate change and HIV/AIDS may also be selective and partial in the use of the Bible.
The sharp focus of the Global Platform will be theological reflection on the use of the Bible. The three presenting issues - Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS – each raise this concern in different ways. The WCC is or will be undertaking programmatic work in each of these areas so the Global Platform theme will be complementary and interactive with this ongoing work.
Au regard des enjeux, ne serait-il pas utile ici de faire valoir le pluralisme linguistique pour plus d'efficience vers l'atteinte des résultats?
Votre réaction m'obligerait.
Merci.
As with the 2007 Global Platform, we welcome postings and attached documents in different languages. Unfortunately, the WCC does not have the resources to translate these.
A good initiative to have this theological reflection going on via the Internet. I look forward to good exchanges of viewpoints here! Thanks for inviting me to take part.
I add my thanks for this forum. SImon could you post a little explanatory note as to how you expect this conversation to move forward? Will you post some introductory materials? I have read with interest the hermeneutic background papers, but assume this pertains mostly to the form of the conversation, not the content. I look forward to the dialogue.
Thanks for your comments. I will be posting papers etc that people have sent us to generate discussion. I will also post the general concept paper for the Global Platform to give people the basic thinking behind it.
Thank you for the invitation to participate; it is an important project.
What has emerged in reflection on African biblical hermeneutics in the past few years have been a recognition that we use a tri-polar hermeneutic. This includes 3 poles: the pole of the biblical text, the pole of the reader's context, and the pole of appropriation. While African biblical hermeneutics has been explicit about the former two poles (text and context), it has been less clear on HOW these poles are brought into dialogue. What makes African biblical scholarship (and other advocacy/committed forms of biblical scholarship) distinctive is that it has been overt about a deliberate engagement between text and context. However, by not being overt about HOW text and context engage, we have not given sufficient attention to the kinds of ideo-theological trajectories that are, in my view, the primary components of the third pole (appropriation).
Appropriation does not simply happen. It is shaped by particular ideo-theological orientations or trajectories of particular readers/interpreters. Most of us would want to claim, of course, that our ideo-theological orientations are shaped by the biblical text. Of course they are. But they are also shaped by our context and our contextual commitments. And most of us would acknowledge this, overtly. They are also shaped by our missionary-colonial ecclesio-missionary heritages (eg. Catholic, evangelical, etc.). They are also shaped by the dominant features of our context at any historical moment (eg. racial separation, HIV/AIDS, etc.).
In sum, the constant to-and-fro between text and context, within the constant impact of the other features I have mentioned, some more explicit than others, an ideo-theological orientation takes shape which enables us to address particular issues, such as those targetted by this forum: Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS.
What I am arguing is that there usually is some kind of (non explicit) coherence in how a particular interpreter goes about engaging with such issues. AND it is not only determined by 'what the Bible says'. The Bible, of course, says nothing without a reader and every reader has a dominant ideo-theological trajectory.
Within African biblical scholarship one can discern at least four ideo-theological trajectories: inculturation, liberation, African feminist, and postcolonial. While there is substantial overlap between these, there is also some distinctiveness. Ecclesio-missionary heritages also provide their own particular emphases to each of these.
So, for example, my own ideo-theological trajectory is liberationist, but includes elements from the other three. I would want to claim that it is a strong biblical trajectory, though not always the dominant one (unfortunately). For me it begins with the God who hears the cry of slaves (in Exodus), is taken up by the prophets in their contestation with the monarchy and the priesthood, and is confirmed and elaborated by Jesus, himself one of the oppressed. However, I have to acknowledge that it is not a self-evident biblical trajectory (a mistake made by many liberation theologians). Just as our world is a site of contestation and struggle, so is the Bible. Having said this, one can see how my contextual location also shapes my ideo-theological orientation. I see life, through my context, as an ongoing struggle of the God of life against the forces of idolatry and death. My ecclesio-missionary heritage does not play much of a role in my ideo-theological orientation, probably because I see the church as a site of struggle, being dominated by conserving, consolidating, and controlling impulses (which, unfortunately, are also found in the Bible). Significant African contextual features such as HIV/AIDS, global neo-liberal capitalism, unemployment, etc. have a powerful impact on my ideo-theological orientation.
I have offered all this as a way of indicating that the Bible is only a component in a rich and complex hermeneutic process -- one that is governed by ideo-theological orientations. If we were overt about our own ideo-theological orientations we would be much closer to understanding each other and understanding why we agree or disagree with each other around Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS. We would also be able to be overt about how we deploy the Bible, for we would have acknowledged that there is nothing self-evident about what the Bible 'says'.
So I must admit that my take on each of these three issues is governed by a privileging of the poor and marginalised in each case (and I would privilege economic factors over other factors such as ethnicity, gender, etc.). What would the Bible 'say' to those on the economic margins of Christian Zionism, climate change and HIV/AIDS? This would be my starting point.
I hope this sufficiently provocative!
It is disappointing that nothing seems to be happening here. I have sent many emails and none have been replied to, and a paper, and there are no recent comments. Is this idea of a Global Platform still alive?
We hope it is still alive and look forward to your comments on what is already up for discussion. It is open for any of the large number of people who have signed up to actualy make use of the opportunity of dialogue. We will put up additional papers when we've had interaction on what is here already. We want to encourage interaction rather than simply posting papers. All the papers that get submitted will be used, where appropriae, as resources for the meeting in September.