Can You Trust Internet Bloggers As A Source Of Theology?
 |
| Picture of pastors who attended the first "Elephant Room" |
"During the first minute and thirty seconds, several members of the group react harshly against Christian bloggers as sources of doctrine or opinion. Painting them as limpwristed, “loving, inclusive guys” living “in their mom’s basement,” the group dismisses Internet-based writers as legitimate sources of doctrinal opinion or interpretation.
This dismissive response of a panel of high profile pastors to the general blogosphere garnered a sharp reaction by bloggers like Zack Hunt over at The American Jesus.
The small spat raises big questions. How does the church view authority in a digital environment? How do we determine if a given voice – whether blogger or pastor – is reliable to shape our theology and practice?
Is legitimacy determined only by the massive number of followers of a celebrity pastor or blogger? If that’s not enough, then what gives weight to the words we speak, type, shout or tweet?"This was a very interesting read and the source of doctrine in blogging is a very valid subject to consider. What I find missing from conversations like this, is the role of an objective "statement of faith" or the "historical creeds." It seems to me that the questions posed above could be answered if we would consider the importance of the church's historical confessions.
For example:
Question: How do we determine if a given voice --whether blogger or pastor -- is reliable to shape our theology and practice? Is legitimacy determined only by the massive number of followers of a celebrity pastor or blogger? If that's not enough, then what gives weight to the words we speak, type, shout or tweet?
Answer: I agree that pastoral legitimacy is not determined by a pragmatic assessment (i.e. if they have a mega-church then they must be theologically sound). But how do we determine whether a given voice is legitimate to shape our theology and practice? For myself I typically read bloggers that are anchored and sourced in confessions that are larger and much older than the blogger himself. If the blogger doesn't have the foggiest idea what the Apostle's Creed, Nicene Creed or the Athanasian Creed are about, I typically don't waste my time reading their material. Thus I would deferentiate between bloggers who simply are restless and reactionary versus those that blog from a confessional and historical context. For myself I do my best on PM Notes to not be a source of new theology but merely write from a context of theology that is above and over me thus never introducing anything new but speaking a message that echoes from our heritage of Lutheranism.Simply put, how do we determine if a given voice is reliable to shape our theology and practice? We determine if it is reliable on the basis of the scriptures, the church's historical creeds and the denominational doctrinal confessions (i.e. for myself and other Lutherans, that is the Book of Concord and our denominational statement of faith).
Without the Word, the objective Historical Creeds and a Statement of Faith, I am afraid that it would be all to easy to be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.
(Note: If you are interested, I have listed 6 documents and 18 Historical and Contemporary Theological Influences that govern and shape the theology of the PM Notes blog. They are listed at the About Page.)
Comments
I'm actually just beginning a blog and have thought along these lines at one point. The inherent responsibilities that come with a blog is such that it can actually teach someone or lead them astray.
My tradition (Southern Baptist) tend to be weak-minded and legalistic so I have thought that one good way to get people in our congregation thinking outside of their inherited presuppositions that form their theology would be to begin a blog. But because of the reason I mention above I wonder if it is wise.
However, on the other hand after having read Luther and many others of the reformation tradition the Gospel has actually become "great news" that needs to be told within my church. So I'm between a "rock and a hard place."
I think the issue is to not teach beyond what you know to understand and as you say to not attempt to say something new. I try to parrot much of what I read/hear from those I have learned that "rightly divide" scripture.
Great post man!
In reading the blogs of others, I check the "about" and "home" pages to see who they are as regards to their theology. I also see what links they have, which is another indicator. Another indicator is who referred me or linked to their blog page. But ultimately, we have to know our own theology well - Creeds, Book of Concord, etc. - so that we can know when something is not in accordance with them .
Right on.
Several thoughts as you begin this journey.
-In making a blog I would suggest putting your presuppositions out front so people know where you are coming from. With PM Notes I try not to deceive anyone. I want them to know that I am coming from a Lutheran perspective. I think this helps unity in Christendom, not hinder it.
-Secondly, what will govern your thoughts and hold you accountable theologically speaking? In other words, what anchors you and is continually shaping you? For me it is the following: The Bible, The Book of Concord, Walther's Law and Gospel, Luther's Heidelberg Disputation.
-Thirdly, who is your audience? For me it is fellow Lutherans and Recovering/Post Evangelicals. With this in mind I attempt to stay inside these parameters. Also, this helps me understand that it isn't my business to hit every issue in Christianity.
As far as blogging. Here is what I have learned.
-Be consistent. Post once a week, every day, or every other day, etc... the point is to keep it consistent.
-Better to be shorter than longer. Keep posts to the point and keep posts to a 2-3 minute reading length.
Alright! Enough for now. Off to play with the kids!
PAX
Now, the question does not say "as a source of truth," but "as a source of theology." Then certainly, everyone who voices an opinion is a source of theology or opinion. The question perhaps should be "as a valuable source." Then, it depends on whether it correctly reflects the Bible, etc, and a blogger is no different than the guy leading a Bible study down the street or Jonathan Edwards.
All authorities of the "old guard" - whether it be the Pope or the current theological establishment - are suspicious and threatened of any new voices, if they are insecure and need to assert themselves as a source of authority. However, if they are themselves humble and are relying on scripture for their authority, their focus should not be on the medium, but on the message.