Rebooting Theology
Now University is starting up again, and I’m taking an continuation course in Theology and an indepth one in History of Religion, a subject which should really be named “All major faiths except christianity” (History of Christianity being a separate subject). Last term I got excellent grades and feedback on my coursework from three out of four teachers. I got some coursework back from that fourth guy yesterday. Not happy reading at all. Why? Mainly because he treats “History of Religion” as if it was only the history of the world religions, and not a subject that interacts with the postmodernity in which we live. We should leave behavioural sciences and possibly enlightening positions from various denomination’s theologies outside the door and step into the vacuum that is Hinduism, Buddhism or Shinto.
Without any instructions as to how to approach these (are we talking about Hinduism two thousand years ago or today?) he is taking my approach of two possible ways to read a text as if I were giving a normative pointer as to what direction is the right one.
It is not the religious scolar’s position to point out the direction forward - that is for the theologian, but it is indeed valid to point out that there hermeneutics are to be taken seriously, and that underdog perspectives such as asian feminism is a valid and alive perspective, although feminism is a term initially made up by westeners. However, should this be applicable in general - that a term or practice can only really live in its original context, then sushi should not be eaten outside Japan and christianity should not be practiced outside Israel.
