There are atheistic clergies. That may sound like an oxymoron. But that's true. One of the recent projects of Daniel Dennett, an academic philosopher / cognitive scientist, seems to verify that [see http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/EP08122150.pdf]. They currently serve as ministers in churches, but they just don't believe what they used or are supposed to believe anymore. Unsurprisingly, as far as I know, many of them are mainline Protestant ministers. I'm pretty sure that there are some from other branches of Christianity (including Catholic priests and evangelical ministers).
Mainline Protestant churches, at least in the U.S., are heavily shaped by theological liberalism. When I occasionally visit mainline Protestant churches in the U.S., I can still sense the vestiges of Adolf von Harnack and Walter Rauschenbusch. The belief that God is still moving in our midst in a supernatural way is somehow frowned upon, as if it's the thing of the past. Christianity is seen simply as a movement for social liberation from politically oppressive forces, such as wealth, power, etc. It simply becomes an anti-discrimination movement. It becomes a movement that liberates women from the bondages imposed by patriarchy, minorities from the bondages imposed by racism, and same-sex partners from the bondages imposed by outdated marital traditions. They are, of course, profound and significant social problems. But I don't consider them as spiritual problems. They are problems that are caused by ignorance. Generally, the cultivation of cultured citizenry can solve such problems. A cultured citizenry breeds critical thinking and open-mindedness. Sexists and racists are just ignorant people. These churches seem to ignore the fact that the mission of the church is primarily spiritual. It is supposed to aim for the transformation of people's lives through their encounters with the living God through Christ.
My guess is that theological liberalism ultimately leads to deism. Such a deistic tendency can easily lead to atheism. In a way, you cannot really blame these clergies. Many of them are conditioned by their own theological and spiritual traditions to be that way. Many mainline Protestant denominations corrupt their parishioners' sense of spiritual innocence, which I consider to be essential for the formation and sustenance of one's faith. Spiritual innocence is like childlike faith. Spiritual innocence is the sense of being vulnerable to awe and wonder in response to an alleged interruption of God in human affairs. Without it, one becomes incapable of responding to God. It's like a child whose excitement to receive simple toys is not spoiled by his or her exposures to extravagance. I don't think that deep engagements in academic pursuits necessarily extinguish that innocence. If that were the case, then no educated elites would have been believers. It appears that such engagements are necessary conditions for the loss of one's faith, but they are definitely not sufficient conditions. That probably explains why, at least according to a report in L.A. Times, atheists tend to know more about Christianity than those who professed to be Christians [see http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-religion-survey-20100928,0,3225238.story]. I guess that you need to be smart to overcome your need for God and to even consider evidences against God's existence. However, the fact that you are smart does not necessarily make you overcome your need for God. Most atheists are possibly smart people, while there are many dumb Christians (in addition to the smart ones).
I used to seriously consider atheism or agnosticism, during my years in college and seminary. But, for whatever reason, I cannot seem to make myself consider such stance anymore. Of course, I am not a conservative evangelical anymore. Many things have changed regarding my theological views. But it appears that, at least for now, there is no amount of anti-theistic or anti-Christian arguments that can compel me to give up my faith in the living God who was embodied in the history of ancient Israel and the life and teachings of Jesus. I don't really ignore such arguments. As a matter of fact, I seriously consider them. But I've had glimpses of God's faithfulness in my life. These glimpses are simple events in my life, where I've seen divine providence in action. They are not dramatically miraculous. They are just events that I cannot personally rule out as mere coincidences. These glimpses are enough to cultivate a sense of gratitude towards God and a sense of faith-building memories of a loving relationship with God. I cannot really doubt the doubtable. In spite of my training in philosophy and theology, I remain to be vulnerable to awe and wonder in response to what I count as divine interruptions in human affairs. I can’t help but feel that way. That’s what I call irresistible grace. I’m not referring to the use of such phrase in Calvinistic soteriology. As a matter of fact, I’m not even a Calvinist at all. I’m just not a big fan. I consider it to have ecclesiological significance. I think that those who have been called by God to serve in the establishment of God's kingdom are the ones who find such grace irresistible. We are called to faithfully preserve and critically revise the biblical tradition through our acts of love and spiritually liberating proclamations.
Mainline Protestants do not need to become fundamentalist evangelicals, in order to sustain their spiritual heritage. Rather, they need to capture a kind of spirituality that combines active social engagements with a theology that is deeply enriched by a loving relationship with God and a childlike faith.
Mainline Protestant churches, at least in the U.S., are heavily shaped by theological liberalism. When I occasionally visit mainline Protestant churches in the U.S., I can still sense the vestiges of Adolf von Harnack and Walter Rauschenbusch. The belief that God is still moving in our midst in a supernatural way is somehow frowned upon, as if it's the thing of the past. Christianity is seen simply as a movement for social liberation from politically oppressive forces, such as wealth, power, etc. It simply becomes an anti-discrimination movement. It becomes a movement that liberates women from the bondages imposed by patriarchy, minorities from the bondages imposed by racism, and same-sex partners from the bondages imposed by outdated marital traditions. They are, of course, profound and significant social problems. But I don't consider them as spiritual problems. They are problems that are caused by ignorance. Generally, the cultivation of cultured citizenry can solve such problems. A cultured citizenry breeds critical thinking and open-mindedness. Sexists and racists are just ignorant people. These churches seem to ignore the fact that the mission of the church is primarily spiritual. It is supposed to aim for the transformation of people's lives through their encounters with the living God through Christ.
My guess is that theological liberalism ultimately leads to deism. Such a deistic tendency can easily lead to atheism. In a way, you cannot really blame these clergies. Many of them are conditioned by their own theological and spiritual traditions to be that way. Many mainline Protestant denominations corrupt their parishioners' sense of spiritual innocence, which I consider to be essential for the formation and sustenance of one's faith. Spiritual innocence is like childlike faith. Spiritual innocence is the sense of being vulnerable to awe and wonder in response to an alleged interruption of God in human affairs. Without it, one becomes incapable of responding to God. It's like a child whose excitement to receive simple toys is not spoiled by his or her exposures to extravagance. I don't think that deep engagements in academic pursuits necessarily extinguish that innocence. If that were the case, then no educated elites would have been believers. It appears that such engagements are necessary conditions for the loss of one's faith, but they are definitely not sufficient conditions. That probably explains why, at least according to a report in L.A. Times, atheists tend to know more about Christianity than those who professed to be Christians [see http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-religion-survey-20100928,0,3225238.story]. I guess that you need to be smart to overcome your need for God and to even consider evidences against God's existence. However, the fact that you are smart does not necessarily make you overcome your need for God. Most atheists are possibly smart people, while there are many dumb Christians (in addition to the smart ones).
I used to seriously consider atheism or agnosticism, during my years in college and seminary. But, for whatever reason, I cannot seem to make myself consider such stance anymore. Of course, I am not a conservative evangelical anymore. Many things have changed regarding my theological views. But it appears that, at least for now, there is no amount of anti-theistic or anti-Christian arguments that can compel me to give up my faith in the living God who was embodied in the history of ancient Israel and the life and teachings of Jesus. I don't really ignore such arguments. As a matter of fact, I seriously consider them. But I've had glimpses of God's faithfulness in my life. These glimpses are simple events in my life, where I've seen divine providence in action. They are not dramatically miraculous. They are just events that I cannot personally rule out as mere coincidences. These glimpses are enough to cultivate a sense of gratitude towards God and a sense of faith-building memories of a loving relationship with God. I cannot really doubt the doubtable. In spite of my training in philosophy and theology, I remain to be vulnerable to awe and wonder in response to what I count as divine interruptions in human affairs. I can’t help but feel that way. That’s what I call irresistible grace. I’m not referring to the use of such phrase in Calvinistic soteriology. As a matter of fact, I’m not even a Calvinist at all. I’m just not a big fan. I consider it to have ecclesiological significance. I think that those who have been called by God to serve in the establishment of God's kingdom are the ones who find such grace irresistible. We are called to faithfully preserve and critically revise the biblical tradition through our acts of love and spiritually liberating proclamations.
Mainline Protestants do not need to become fundamentalist evangelicals, in order to sustain their spiritual heritage. Rather, they need to capture a kind of spirituality that combines active social engagements with a theology that is deeply enriched by a loving relationship with God and a childlike faith.
Comments