WHY THEOLOGY? IS IT REALLY NECESSARY?  

As we encounter different claims regarding doctrinal and theological perspectives, we can't help but ask if it is really necessary to have a theology in the life of the Church and of the individual believer.  We might ask "What is the use?"  Many consider theology a total waste of time, and others consider it something that is totally unnecessary. 

As I continue to hear of and witness so much atrocity, suffering, and tragedy in the world, though I have always loved the study of theology (God-talk), I sometimes become discouraged and disillusioned, and even adopt the attitude of "what the hell?"  I say to myself "let's just focus on suffering, and the hell with all this theological razzle dazzle." I ask myself, "Does God even care whether or not we have a theology?"

Some would say that theology is in a state of disarray. There are no commanding theological figures on the level or order of Karl Barth, Paul Tillich, Rudolf Bultmann, etc.  But I wonder if that even matters, given the issue of the relevancy or non-relevancy of theology in our time.  

While there have been battles in history surrounding certain issues such as fundamentalism vs. liberalism, biblical literalism vs. biblical criticism, etc. it appears that there is an apathy, not only in the world, but also in the community of believers, towards things theological. It appears that the average person sitting in the pew does not know about or even care to know about these theological controversies.  The attitude is one of "let's prepare ourselves for Christ's second coming," or "let's commit and dedicate ourselves to eradicating social ills."  

I personally, see the importance of the role of theology.  The reason for this is because I believe that we have to be clear as to what we believe and why.  Indeed, there is suffering going on in the world, but I think that having a well-thoughtout  theology, will enable us to deal with that suffering in a manner which is both effective and faithful to the message of the Gospel.

There are some advantages in the present situation. For one thing, there is greater ecumenicity (interfaith relations among Christians of different orientations and traditions).  A person beginning the study of theology now is free as never before to draw upon the resources of many different traditions-Catholic as well as Protestant, Calvinist as well as Lutheran.  Even the Eastern Orthodox tradition has become accessible to theologians from the West, as it was not in earlier times. In fact, if there is any one characteristic that sets the present situation off from all previous ones, it is the manifest pluralism of religious traditions.  Christianity is conceived far more broadly today than at any time in its history, and traditions outside Christianity are taken more seriously than they once were.  It is not inconceivable even that a Christian theologian should learn from a Buddhist, Hindu, or Islamic thinker (Robert H. King, "Introduction to the Task of Theology," in Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks., Peter Hodgson and Robert H. Kings, eds.  Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994, p. 1).

Another positive feature of the present time is the increased recognition that theology, for all its reliance upon tradition, is a constructive undertaking.  What has previously been set down cannot simply be taken for granted.  The tradition we have received has evolved over time, and we ourselves contribute to its further development by the way in which we appropriate and apply it. We had therefore, best take responsibility for what we say and in the way we say it.  That is especially true if what we seek is a "systematic theology," for whatever else that term may mean, it surely connotes a deliberate ordering of ideas, the self-conscious articulation of a theological position (Ibid., p. 2). 

Still there is no real consensus about either the substance or the task of Christian theology. The tendency is rather toward a kind of laissez-faire eclecticism, with theologians pursuing various thematic interests, but no one undertaking a genuinely inclusive, unified approach to the exposition of Christian doctrine. Even a serious and sustained critique of traditional positions is difficult to mount, because it is not at all clear from what stance or on what grounds such a critique would be carried out.  We are, for the most part, uncertain even  as to what the options are (Ibid). 

So perhaps the best approach would be to review how we have arrived at where we are: to examine what have been the paradigms for systematic articulation of Christian faith in the past, and the ways in which these paradigms have been challenged, transformed, and replaced in the modern period (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) 

We are, in other words, called to tell the story of Christian theology, with a view to better understanding the present exigency.  This approach ought not to be expected to resolve the outstanding issues, but it should put us in a better position to appreciate what those issues are and to take the measure of the task before us (King, op. cit., p. 1).

In summary, the task of theology, if I may say so, is to retrieve to the extent possible, "the faith once delivered to the saints."  Theology is a hermeneutical task, i.e. seeking to effectively and faithfully interpret the experiences, traditions, and scriptures which shape and form it. 

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer. Amen!

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona 

Past Professor of Theology 

Tainan Theological College/Seminary