Life of the Mind – Part 3
The most common critique of "the life of the mind" that I hear is one for which I have the some sympathy. This critique states that the life of the mind takes the focus off of just living for Jesus. I understand the sentiment behind it, but get frustrated with the "all or nothing" way in which it is generally presented.
I most often hear this accusation in somewhat awkward situations. I can be involved in a good theological discussion (online or in person) and someone uncomfortable with conflict or intellectual discourse will jump in and shut down the conversation by asserting that all that really matters is loving Jesus. We need stop all this talk and get our focus back onto loving and serving Jesus. Of course no one can continue the discussion because then we obviously don't love Jesus. The moderator feels pious and holy and the rest of us sheepish and frustrated. But honestly I think this objection asserted this way is completely wrong and somewhat dangerous. Theology does matter and in fact has everything to do with loving Jesus.
What we believe determines how we act. Theology has institutionalized racism and sexism. Theology has justified rape, slaughter, and torture. Theology has encouraged greed and spread poverty. Theology has pillaged lands and destroyed ecosystems. Don't tell me it doesn't matter. It determines exactly what it looks like for a person to follow Jesus. Unless we take a good look at what we believe and realize that "all Christians at all times" have NOT believed as we do, dangerous theologies will continue to flourish. I discuss theology, read books, and study scripture because I love Jesus and want to follow him. Understanding his commands, how his words would have been understood by his audience, and how the church over time has interpreted his words is important to me. Blindly following or not questioning why or what I am following seems highly irresponsible to me. If I love Jesus then I will take the time to intellectually understand what I believe.
Sure it is a problem if all I ever do is discuss or read about Jesus' commands and never actually obey any of them. To put it bluntly, that's just dumb (and suggests that I seriously failed in my understanding of scripture). Many intellectuals have failed to live out their faith and actually do the things Jesus commands us to do, so I understand the fear in this accusation against the life of the mind that intellectualism could result in just words and no action. But living for Jesus isn't an either/or between the two. Sure faith without works is dead, but unexamined actions can be harmful and can actually stand in the way of living for Jesus. Both are necessary for the Christian who wants to "live for Jesus."
So I'm done with being told to shut up and just serve, or to stop thinking and just get to know Jesus. Those aren't dichotomies; both are required while neither should be privileged. I love Jesus and so I will engage my faith intellectually. That is living for Jesus.
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
"What we believe determines how we act." Amen to that. And the reverse is equally true. We can determine what a person truly believes by looking at how s/he behaves. Theology can either reveal or conceal a person's faith, depending on how it is used.
I am most impressed by theology that can be readily understood by people of diverse backgrounds (including levels of education). The best theology, I believe, is mostly free of theological jargon. I think you do a good job of this, by the way.
Another good post Julie. As usual, I'm reminded of C.S. Lewis. In his literary criticism he says something to the effect that "every road into Jerusalem can also be a road out of Jerusalem." Theology, the life of the mind, the activity of the scholar, can either be a road toward richer and deeper and truer relationship with God as you write about, or it can be a road to a cold blooded, prideful and spiritually empty exercise of my mental faculties. Something similar can be said of most activities, including more emotionally-based forms of worship.
Pete, I agree. Lewis (again) said much the same. He suggested that if you can't put the gist of what you believe into language that the unlearned can understand, then either you don't believe it yourself, or you don't understand it all that well yourself. He may not have left room in that statement for those who just don't have a great gift of communication. But overall, I think he was on to something.
This has been a great series, Julie! I resonate with it a lot. I majored in Biblical Studies, so how could I not spend lots of time thinking about Bible/theology stuff and caring what other people think?
One of my professors at Wheaton said something once that stuck with me. It encapsulates a lot of what you talked about in this post, and has become my impassioned response to frustrated people who ask why I "waste" so much effort on such a "non-essential" thing. He said, and I say too, that "Bad theology hurts people!"
It is so true.
I've been following this series on my read…just really good.
In seminary we really covered this topic. JP wrote Love your God with all Your Mind which I'd recommend to everyone, but I don't know how many Christians understand it is not just intellectualism or reading books. The connection with your whole formation and the role your mind plays.
Thank you for this series you're on!
Cheers.
Hey Julie–every once in awhile I pull into port and get good internet and check out whats happening at emerging women. I always appreciate your posts. I like the way you think (which is apt I guess in regards to your post here).
As I see it, the problem with "just serving" is that apart from thinking and questioning I think we run the risk of doing things without considering why–which, don't you think, can lead to dogmatism? Or fundamentalism?
Thanks again for the post–Kim (the boat gal)
Pete and Karl – good points. I do think theology needs to be understood, but that there also needs to be space for teaching the "unlearned." Too often I find those who know little to be proud that they know little and refuse to learn more. They ridicule the learned and and accuse us of elitism and irrelevance. The learned of course need to attempt to be understood, but the unlearned must also make the attempt to understand.
Kim – I agree we often don't consider the "why" of what we do. Generally this is done in the name of "faith or trust," but it can lead down dangerous roads like fundamentalism.
Very true. This is my first time reading your blog and it was exactly what I needed to hear. Thank you, thank you.
~Natalie
Nothing so dangerous as a woman who thinks, Julie. I married one. I wish you guys would just stick to eating apples. Thanks for a great series.
The keyboard doesn't communicate irony very well. I find myself wanting to be sure my wisecrack about apples comes across as such. Years ago, my wife and I promoted a Christian women's seminar at our church. The speaker said that God wills the husband to balance the checkbook; the woman is not to do it. To question that bit of wisdom wasn't allowed! As a contemplative, I enjoy the mystic moment. But of equal value, especially in identifying te false or foolish, is intellectual rigor. Again, thanks from someone who thins 30 minutes a day. jh