by Walter R. Strickland II

* Editor’s Note: This post is an excerpt from “Racial Tension, the Baptist Tradition, and Christian Unity” in Baptists and the Christian Tradition: Toward an Evangelical Baptist Catholicity.

___

The effects of homogeneous communities extend into Scripture reading and theological formulation. Scripture readers often approach the task like any other, as self-interested people who privilege their findings over others’. As a result, reading the Bible and doing theology in a homogeneous group limits humanity’s ability to understand all that God is doing in Scripture. The biblical text is far richer and more wonderfully complex than any individual or homogeneous group can discern. Yet, in denominationally affiliated seminaries, homogeneity of biblical interpreters is common.[1]

Contemporary Southern Baptists tend to downplay the role of context (denominational or otherwise) in Bible reading and theology because, historically, progressive Christians have inflated the place of context over Scripture itself. To avoid the same error, evangelicals may insist theology and Bible study are noncultural realities. But contextual realities have always been at play, influencing Scripture reading and theology, as well as other Christian practices such as discipleship and education. Therefore, a particular context has become inherent to each denomination. The question becomes, what context is dominant? The most popular or influential culture in a denomination tends to become the baseline or measure from which all cultures are judged. As a result, that dominant culture is mistakenly considered culturally neutral.[2] In the quest to avoid cultural captivity in Scripture reading or theologizing, it may appear advantageous for each Christian to align himself with the dominant culture in his denomination—because that culture is assumed to be normal.

But being part of the “normal” culture can breed an inflated view of self that produces a subconscious (or at times conscious) form of cultural supremacy. The “normal” cultural perspective is then asserted in biblical, organizational, and cultural interpretation. A temptation for those who embody the “normal” culture is attempting to judge the validity of nondominant cultures. It is common for minority cultures to be accepted insofar as their biblical and theological contributions match the dominant culture. Denominationally, the effect is multifold. First, this phenomenon generates a theology that engages only the inquiries of a particular dominant cultural group while masquerading as a “universal” theology of all people. Second, because denominational theological formulation can become parochial, theology can become a means of justifying denominational activity rather than setting a biblical course of action.

Learning to cherish a tradition yet look beyond its theological biases is a necessary skill for the theologian who serves within a denominational context. Perhaps for the first time, the people of God can gain a fuller perspective of how God is working in his world when they see that the Christian worldview is sufficiently robust to engage all of life in every context—this is a theological endeavor.

People from different backgrounds raise unique questions and bring different experiences to the table. As diverse groups surround the Word of God—the source of truth—and submit to its claims on their lives, the Holy Spirit cultivates biblical wisdom in each individual to engage life’s circumstances in light of the risen Lord. As burdens are borne across the lines of difference, new opportunities arise to theologize on behalf of others in ways that illuminate Scripture’s implications for each participant’s life.

___

[1] This observation is intended not to critique the existence of denominational seminaries but to acknowledge that they can easily become echo chambers that cease to equip students to serve the whole people of God.

[2] It is important to note that the dominant culture is not always the dominant culture in the United States as a whole but rather the dominant culture within the institution in question.