I have been reading “Character Theology: Engaging God Through His Cast of Characters,” by Tom Steffen and Ray Neu. I hope to have a review done in a couple of weeks. However, I was reading a passage that got me thinking:

“Recall Charles Hodge’s perspective that the Bible is a “store-house of facts” and “the duty of the Christian theologian is to ascertain, collect, and combine all the facts which God has revealed concerning himself and our relation to Him.” We are in the process of jettisoning some of this baggage…”

<Steffen, Tom; Neu, Ray. Character Theology: Engaging God through His Cast of Characters (p. 23). Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition.>

I do have to admit that Charles Hodge has long been one of the great examples of who I don’t want to be as a minister and theologian. But on a practical level, I do find myself drifting into a focus on “facts.” The section of the book where this quote is speaks of Steffen and Neu struggling with the fascination with faith and abstractions.

This reminds me of an experience pretty early in my mission work in the Philippines. I was visiting a Christian and Missionary Alliance church (or as it is known in the Philippines, “CAMACOP”). I have never been a formal member of that denomination, but had attended churches this denomination for several years of my life. A friend had invited me to speak at his church. I was invited to sit in on the Adult Sunday School. It was an interesting experience. Sunday School is a hard-sell in the Philippines, so I was impressed by the high percentage of adults who attended.

The language of the Sunday School class was Ilocano (if I remember right… although it could have been Kankana-ey). I did not know the language beyond a few words. Despite this, I was able to follow along in much of this. Much of this was because the training was being done in some rather heavy doctrines. The doctrinal aspects were, unsurprisingly, very jargon-driven. Being trained a fair bit in fundamentalist theology, I knew the words and realized that the adults were dealing with some fairly heavy theology.

I was a bit jealous. My own denomination (Southern Baptist) tends to be rather theologically “light weight.” If anything, theology is given even less importance in the Philippine SB churches than those in the US. So why was it that a denomination that was born out of the desire to be more practically focused in terms of church and ministry being so dedicated to indoctrination of, well… doctrine.

Over the years I have thought about that a fair bit, and have had some questions regarding this.

#1. Is focusing on doctrine such a good thing in Sunday School? Perhaps it is not out of a desire for adults to grow in their relationship with God, but a fear that their church plants may veer away from their parent churches in the US. Perhaps they believe that it is okay for US churches to wrestle with theology and doctrine, but mission churches should just be trained in the end results.

#2. Theology is a reflective process, so isn’t simply teaching doctrine short-circuiting the process of real growth? Charles Hodge, in another well-known quote, stated that he came to the conclusion that (Reformed) theologians before him pretty much got everything figured out, and so his job is to collect and disseminate this compendium of knowledge to the next generation. (I am giving my own take on the quote… I don’t have it in front of me.) But theology is supposed to change since it serves as a bridge between God’s revelation and our changing setting. As long as our setting changes, as well as the questions we have, theology must change. Focusing on indoctrination can leave the adults ill-equipped to deal with changes of circumstances and settings.

#3. Related to the last, does the theology and doctrines of the US churches express God’s character, actions, and interaction with us with the language, categories, and metaphors that are most suitable for the Philippine Highlands? It certainly seems unlikely.

#4. Is the best way to train people theologically through written instruction and lecture? Maybe it is through group interactions with a facilitator wrestling with lived experiences.

#5. While the area where this church exists is in a place of high literacy, perhaps a greater focus on story would be better. In that area, the traditional ethical system is/was “lawa at inayan.” This means something like “curses and duties.” However, it is essentially an ethical system that is built on stories and transferred to the next generation through stories. Perhaps a better way to instruct in theology is not to teach new terms that label abstract categories, but to embrace stories (primarily but not exclusively Biblical stories). Such a theology may naturalize better than labels. They may also be more easy to apply to life situations better.

Anyway, I am not complaining about the church in the story. I was impressed by their dedication to training up their adults— a rare thing in churches worldwide. I just feel that there may be a better way.