By Julius-Kei Kato, PhD
These are some random thoughts I have on this topic which I will present at this year’s AAR session
of the movement Theology Without Walls (November 24, 2024, San Diego,
CA)
[00] Introduction: From a ‘Religion of God’ to a
‘Religion of Life’
The urgency of theology being in dialogue with secularity is obvious: Many of us are located right smack in the middle of very secularized people and contexts. Hence, I’m asking: What can ‘Theology Without Walls’ (henceforward, TWW) contribute to this conversation?
Above everything else though,
let me point out that there is this contemporary phenomenon in which the kind
of “religion” (Note that I take “religion” here to mean “a passionate devotion
to something”) … so, the kind of ‘religion’ unconsciously professed by a great many
people in secular contexts, it seems, has undergone a seismic shift in the
recent past. It has effectively shifted from a religion centered on ‘God’ (theos),
to a religion centered on “life” (I mean the Greek: zoé), not just “life
in general,” but rather: life in the here and now. Hence, the operative
religion of many people we know (perhaps even the religion we ourselves follow
without being fully aware of it) can be called a “religion of life.” And this
is often true even if people can still identify with a traditional kind of
religious faith.
To elaborate, the prevalent
situation in which many of us are located, particularly in the West (and in
Westernized contexts around the world), is one in which the primary “devotion”
(to use a traditional, religious-sounding term) or—to use a more neutral term—the
primary “concern” of many … perhaps most(?) people is no
longer directed to a theistic notion of God (still the operative notion of God
in many churches). No, the utmost concern, (I like to use) “devotion” of many
people has shifted instead to ‘life itself in the here and now’. Back to my
basic question: Can TWW explore and suggest alternative meaning systems/new
paths of religion or spirituality that are more relevant in our contexts today
as conventional ideas of God and religion, hitherto prevalent in the West, are
increasingly fading away? That would be an elaborate version of my burning
question.
This presentation is something
like my two-cents worth on this topic.
[01] What is Theology “Without
Walls”? (How I understand it)
I guess it’s good to start with
TWW’s opposite—Theology WITH walls (TWiW) aka, traditional theology. Theology WITH
Walls, we can say, is a particular religious community’s “inner discourse”
regarding—what the community considers—ultimate matters. In the Western
religious tradition, “the Ultimate” has commonly taken the form of theos
or “God.” Since it is “insider talk,” the community itself, namely, its own authority
structure, is the ultimate arbiter of the discourse. Outsiders should not
interfere. We can say that this way of doing theology has serious limitations
because it is a product of in-breeding, in a certain sense. It can listen and
try to learn from others. And sometimes, it does. But the fundamental stance it
takes (especially for well-established religious communities) is that our
community’s “discourse about God” is the “the best” … at least for us.
TWW is (or at least aims to be) the
antithesis of that. It proposes that theology CANNOT and SHOULD NOT remain an
“insider discourse.” It proposes to break down the walls of the enterprise of
theology. Theology, it proposes, in the sense of “Discourse regarding Ultimacy”
is common to humanity because seeking ultimacy or transcendence
is a deeply hardwired human pursuit.
In this endeavor, theology
without walls can consider secularism as an ally. How so? (The following is from
philosopher John Caputo’s explanation) “Secular” refers to a public order where ideally there
is no one who has hegemony or control over others. Hence, it includes the
separation of church and state so that each would not interfere with the
affairs of the other. Instead, there is the existence and acceptance of a
plurality of opinions (including religious ones). The secular order is
envisioned then to be an open-ended, polymorphic, polyvocal order which
includes diverse voices saying all sorts of things. In principle, anyone in a
secular society has the right to ask any question. (This is from an online talk
of Caputo at The Wheatly Institution)
In such a context, if there be any “discourse about ultimacy/transcendence” (aka, theology), it necessarily has to be “without walls,” that is, an “open-ended, polymorphic, polyvocal order of diverse sorts of people saying all sorts of things. In a secular context, one cannot take refuge in “insider’s discourses” about ultimacy or about God.
