Dave Hegeman asked sometime ago (weeks? days? sadly, I don’t know), “What does post-modern give you that a biblical (reformed) philosophical framework doesn’t provide?”
There’s something about the question that bothers me, and I think I may just be reading too much into it, but I would first like to say that I don’t think they’re postmodernism and a “biblical philosophical framework” contradict. I think James K. A. Smith (Introducing Radical Orthodoxy) is one guy that’s really tackling this subject (though I’m not nearly as “Reformed” as him and thus don’t have a lot of the same conclusions). I think his work is monumental.
I also don’t want to infer that I want to be a postmodernist. I think that postmodernism offers us a lot. Let me try to set out a few ways I think postmodernism can be beneficial.
1. Ancient Futurism. In a lot of ways, Christian postmodernism is about returning to our traditions. It takes in history in a way that modernism doesn’t. Robert Webber has a series of books that all start with “Ancient Future” (Ancient Future Faith, Ancient Future Time, Ancient Future Worship). Although I’m not always sure how to take Webber, I find him extremely helpful, and I think the “ancient future” theme is something postmodernism offers—bringing the traditionals of old into the future…or for those of you that are still hooked on postmillienialism…postmillenializing our ancientness.
2. A recovery of ontology. Reformed modernists seem hooked on separating or hiding ontology in or from their epistemology. Postmodernism is more self-conscious.
3. A new perspective (*gasp*) on metanarratives. I think Christian modernists see the rejection of metanarratives as the rejection of Scripture. This simply isn’t true. If I understand the postmodernists correctly (and remember it’s been years since I’ve read some of the weightier ones), what they are rejecting is saying truth is based on autonomy within the person.
4. Relationships over propositionalism. I think this is something we sorely have to discover. Rachel was talking yesterday about her court case, and it got me thinking about how 21st century presbyterianism is going to look 500 years down the road. I see the FV and NPP sides of the issues “winning out.” That’s not to say I agree with all the things they’re saying, but I think 500 years from now and think what we now think of 16th century Rome. “Wow, they really missed the boat there.” Obviously, this isn’t going to be such a huge thing as the Reformation (I think pomo-ists think it will be, and I think that’s part of where they fail in humility), but I can’t help but think that people will see guys like L. Duncan as old traditionalists…a new Rome, unwilling to let theology change when it needs to.
5. Interpretive maximalism in hermeneutics. Now, the Bible isn’t like any other book, but what others are doing in the field of literature can be helpful. Biblical hermeneutics will have different governing factors…I think liturgical/sacramental and ecclesiological concerns will influence hermeneutics more. I think pomo will have to play a role in that and is already.
6. Humility. I know DW says they’re just horribly arrogant, but I think he’s off. I understand his concern, but I also think he’s misreading and misconxtextualizing their work. They do have some arrogant aspects in the pop culture (not so much in the scholarly realm), like they think too much of themselves as a “movement.”
7. Perhaps my biggest problem with modernists trying to critique pomo is that they are just completely off in what they think pomo is. I don’t think defining pomo is an easy thing, so I get frustrated with caricatures. To modernists, pomo is a complete denial of the basic fundamentals of modernism. But anyone who has really read them with an open heart realizes that they think are working through modernism and moving past modernism. They are not hypocritically embracing modernism when they make moral judgments or distinguish right from wrong because they’re not denying those as valid descriptions of things.
Just a bit of rambling thoughts. I’d really appreciate anyone that would like to add, critique, or correct. I’m by no means an expert of pomo. I just don’t fear it. (By the way, pomo looks kinda like porno, don’t you think?)
