Commentary 'Progressive theology' is coming to the fore By John H. Adams The Layman Online Thursday, December 19, 2002 Some of the theologies seeping into the Presbyterian Church (USA) now are being euphemistically categorized as "progressive," which probably means different things to different Presbyterians. But its most vocal advocates in the PCUSA – including the Covenant Network, a number of seminary professors, church officers who are openly defying the denomination's constitution, the Witherspoon Society and others – have common goals. One of their shared purposes is to portray Biblical doctrine as outdated and inconsistent with modern understanding on a number of issues. For instance, for "progressives," on the issue of homosexual practice, the American Psychiatric Association, which says it is normal, trumps the Bible, which says it is abnormal. But progressive theology isn't limited to sexual issues. It questions the Lordship of Christ, the efficacy of Jesus' atoning death, the miracles of the Bible, many of the commandments of God – even revelation itself. And neither is it limited to a single theology. One of its advocates, Dr. Douglas Ottati of Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, Va., speaks of progressive theology as a conglomeration of theologies: process, liberal, Christian realist, liberationist, feminist, black, womanist and Minjung, a Korean philosophy that is a radical re-interpretation of Christianity. Whatever it means, progressive theology has some high-profile advocates in the PCUSA. Eugene Bay, the co-moderator of the Covenant Network, told the organization's recent national conference that, besides its continued campaign to repeal the "fidelity/chastity" ordination standard in the PCUSA Constitution, it would begin to focus more on progressive theology. That conference featured two theologians – Anna Case-Winters and Paul Capetz – who argued that the blood atonement of Christ is not essential for salvation, a common teaching in progressive theology. The Witherspoon Society, another organization that advocates ordaining practicing homosexuals, has scheduled a conference in March to focus on the "progressive" witness. Ottati, who says it is not necessary for Christians to believe in a bodily resurrection of Jesus, will be among the cast. So will former PCUSA Moderator Jack B. Rogers, who advocates marriage between homosexuals, and Chris Glaser, a homosexual writer who says "coming out" for a gay person is sacramental. Some Presbyterian congregations have made progressive theology a virtual mission statement. Sausalito Presbyterian Church in California publishes on its Web site a statement that says, "Jesus Christ is the foundation to our path to God, but we recognize that he represents one of many ways to know God. We recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the pathway to the Divine. …We think that the way we treat one another and other people is more important than the way we express our beliefs." Sausalito, a paid affiliate of the Center for Progressive Christianity and a member of More Light Presbyterians, is currently advertising for a new pastor – "a liberal Christian, open to other spiritual paths and theologies." The church's information form says the candidate for minister should be prepared to introduce the congregation's youth to progressive theology. The phrase progressive theology is not new, even though the theology may have evolved – as progressive theology is always evolving. In 1888, C.H. Spurgeon, writing in the Sword and Towel, addressed the progressive movement of his time with a blunt assessment: "The idea of a progressive gospel seems to have fascinated many. To us that notion is a sort of cross-breed between nonsense and blasphemy. After the gospel has been found effectual in the eternal salvation of untold multitudes, it seems rather late in the day to alter it; and, since it is the revelation of the all-wise and unchanging God, it appears somewhat audacious to attempt its improvement. When we call up before our mind's eye the gentlemen who have set themselves this presumptuous task, we feel half inclined to laugh; the case is so much like the proposal of moles to improve the light of the sun. Their gigantic intellects are to hatch out the meanings of the Infinite! We think we see them brooding over hidden truths to which they lend the aid of their superior genius to accomplish their development!" The father of today's progressive theology is reputed to be retired Episcopal Bishop John S. Spong, who has been called "the Martin Luther King of Progressive Christianity." A few years ago, Spong spoke at Fourth Presbyterian Church in Chicago at the invitation of the congregation's senior minister, Dr. John Buchanan, the founding co-moderator of the Covenant Network, a former moderator of the PCUSA and senior editor of The Christian Century. Spong has spelled out his version of progressive theology in 12 tenets that, if followed, would dismantle the last vestige of orthodox Christianity: 1. "Theism, as a way of defining God, is dead. So most theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way to speak of God must be found." 2. "Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt." 3. "The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense." 4. "The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ's divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible." 5. "The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity." 6. "The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed." 7. "Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history." 8. "The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age." 9. "There is no external, objective, revealed standard writ in scripture or on tablets of stone that will govern our ethical behavior for all time." 10. "Prayer cannot be a request made to a theistic deity to act in human history in a particular way." 11. "The hope for life after death must be separated forever from the behavior control mentality of reward and punishment. The Church must abandon, therefore, its reliance on guilt as a motivator of behavior." 12. "All human beings bear God's image and must be respected for what each person is. Therefore, no external description of one's being, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, can properly be used as the basis for either rejection or discrimination." Spong's list reads like a voucher for a parallel progressive theological movement known as the Jesus Seminar, in which unbelieving teachers of religion decide arbitrarily which parts of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus are genuine. They delete the substance of faith and leave a moralizing Jesus with no atoning powers. Many Presbyterian congregations have welcomed Jesus Seminar presentations. Ghost Ranch, a Presbyterian conference center in New Mexico, has offered Jesus Seminar programs. Progressive theology also has kinship with the ReImagining God movement that began in 1993. The ReImagining themes – that the crucifixion was unnecessary, that God is a goddess named Sophia, that Biblical sexual ethics are outdated, that milk and honey are more apt communion elements than the those representing the body and blood of Christ – resonate with the teachings of progressive theologians. With strong support from some Presbyterian staff leaders – both in money and attendance – the first ReImagining God conference in 1993 ignited a backfire in the Presbyterian Church (USA), causing the denomination to lose millions of dollars and leading the 1994 General Assembly to declare that the movement was beyond the bounds of the Christian faith. But that did not stop "ReImagining God" from making inroads into the PCUSA. The denomination included writings by prominent Re-Imagining speakers in a resource guide for a group known as the National Network of Presbyterian College Women. Fully funded by the denomination, the NNPCW was essentially a network of radical feminists who, among other things, decided to offer prayers to a female Jesus ("Christa"), promote lesbianism and join others in the progressive theology movement to oppose the denomination's ordination standard. The Network even used its Web site to provide an off-ramp to pornographic material. (For a few hours, the 1998 General Assembly voted the NNPCW out of the denomination's budget. But, aided by the General Assembly staff, the Network staged a passionate plea for survival, and commissioners changed their minds. Instead of terminating the network, they called for a task force to investigate the group. Subsequently, the Network was placed on probation and told to discard its publication.) The ReImagining movement will celebrate its 10th anniversary with a three-day meeting in Minneapolis in June. Two of its main speakers – Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker – will give a "progressive" reinterpretation of the work of Christ, as outlined in their book In Proverbs of Ashes: Why We Weren't Saved by the Death of Jesus. "We were convinced Christianity could not promise healing for victims of intimate violence as long as its central image was a divine parent who required the death of his child," Brock said in their prelude to the book. "You couldn't look on the man of sorrows and give thanks to God without ending up a partner in a thousand crimes," Parker wrote.

Respond to this article

Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links