Three Styles of Contemporary Ecclesiologies

“The Mission of the Church”: Hartzler Bible Lectures, Bethel College, March 2024

Introduction

The townspeople’s terror and anguish were palpable. Gunshots and armed conflict had been going on for more than a day and a night when the first cylinder bomb exploded at 10:30 a.m. It was May 2, 2002. The day before, the leftist guerrilla group known as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP) had attacked the far-right paramilitary group, United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), in the town of Bojayá. Both illegal armed groups had been fighting for control of this territory coveted for its wealth of natural resources and the routes that it provided for the illicit trafficking of arms and drugs.

Bojayá is in the Department of Chocó on Colombia’s northern Pacific coast. The population is mainly indigenous and Afro-Colombian. The region has a long history of human rights violations and extreme poverty and has suffered abandonment by the Colombian government. The Catholic Church has also been present in Bojayá for centuries. Perhaps for this reason, on this particular day, amid the armed combat and explosions, about 1,500 townspeople of Bojayá decided to seek refuge in the Catholic church building, in the priest’s home, and among the Augustinian nuns.

At 10:45 a.m., another cylinder bomb torpedoed through the roof of the church where children and whole families were sheltering and exploded on the altar. The bomb killed 119 people and left 98 wounded. The explosion also destroyed the arms and legs of the church’s crucifix, leaving only the torso intact.

Throughout Colombia, this image of the mutilated Christ became a symbol of the 2002 massacre in Bojayá. Years after, during the peace negotiations between the FARC and the Colombian government in 2015, leaders of the FARC visited the community of Bojayá and asked the families of the victims for forgiveness. Amazingly, when Colombia voted in the plebiscite on the peace agreement that had been hammered out between the government and the FARC, 96 percent of the people in Bojayá voted in favour of making peace. In contrast, a slight majority of the country – especially a substantial majority of Evangelical, Pentecostal and charismatic churches – voted against the accords.^[1] The result was a national rejection of the peace accord. Shortly after, however, the accords were renegotiated and then signed in November of 2016.^[2]

What does this story have to do with theology? How churches speak about God has social implications for those churches and their contexts. Theology shapes ecclesiology and ecclesiology shapes missiology. The willingness to forgive present in the people of Bojayá and how Christians from different traditions voted in the 2016 peace process plebiscite is a result of how churches do theology, experience church life, and practice their understanding of their mission in the Colombian context.

Ecclesiologies in the Colombian context

In this presentation, we will describe the ecclesiologies we find in Colombia. By basing our reflections on a particular context, we hope other places find common aspects and intersected points to facilitate local application in their contexts.

The distinctive ecclesiologies that have emerged in the Colombian context can be grouped into three basic types, regardless of the confessional identity of the churches. According to their distinctive emphases, these ecclesiologies tend to privilege reason, justice, or experience.

To analyze the three ecclesiologies, we will use a similar methodological outline in contemporary theology that Catholic professor Gerald O’Collins proposes. However, we have modified his approach based on three “styles” of doing theology (reason, justice, and experience^[3]). We make a distinction he does not make between hermeneutical lenses and resources. Similarly, based on the Colombian ecclesiological context, we add Pentecostal theologies to what O’Collins defines as experience.

At this point, here are two clarifications about the content of this presentation:

• Some theological works offer a typological analysis of theologies.^[4] However, most authors employ systematic theology to compare theological perspectives, content, and social impact. O’Collins is the only author we know who offers a typology of theological methods.
• Although each ecclesiology analyzed in this presentation emphasizes one source or one hermeneutic lens, this does not mean they ignore or avoid the other sources or hermeneutic lenses entirely. We can also find elements of the other ecclesiologies in each style that primarily represent one ecclesiology.^[5] However, emphasizing one specific element is evidence of the prevailing ecclesiology.

Ecclesiologies of reason^[6]

In O’Collins’ typology, the first theological method privileges the use of reason. It finds its sources in written texts – in the Bible, philosophy, and tradition.^[7] In this method, faith is understood as knowledge. The truth is located in reason illuminated by faith.

Considering that, according to Alister McGrath, “philosophical ideas about how knowledge is acquired and developed determine the way in which the theological material is arranged,”^[8] the architecture of this method is very academic. Following this way of doing theology, some theologians begin by discussing the possibility of knowing God. They present philosophical themes that attempt to explain how human beings acquire ideas about God. Included here is the topic of revelation. In the Protestant church, revelation comes primarily through the Bible. In the Roman Catholic Church, revelation occurs initially through nature. Following these philosophical discussions, both Catholics and Protestants introduce creation, fall, sin, and finally redemption through Jesus. Some examples of this way of structuring theological concepts are represented in the Catholic church by Karl Rahner^[9] and in the Protestant church by the writings of Louis Berkhof.^[10]

As mentioned above, the Catholic version of this method privileges speculation and what is known as “natural theology.” This is the belief that “there is such a thing as a ‘capacity for revelation’ […] which man possesses even apart from revelation,” explains Karl Barth.^[11] Catholic theologians such as the Spanish Andrés Torres Queiruga affirm that God has revealed himself to all humanity through creation, history and personal experience.^[12] In this approach, revelation is not something extrinsic but a reality in which all humans exist.

The version of this theological method we will expand on here is the Protestant way of doing theology that mainly spread along conservative Evangelicalism. It is evidenced in Colombia in ecclesiologies that understand the Bible as the revelation of God – and this in a propositional way, emphasizing reason.^[13] It creates the impression that God has revealed himself through a set of ideas, as if revelation, in the words of McGrath, were some data bank.^[14] This way of thinking, typically modern, understands truth as universal, rational and thus open to verification. “The ‘true’ is what has passed the test of scientific verification or is guaranteed by solid historical documentation,” explains Ignace de la Potterie.^[15]

The roots of this method are in the philosophical system proposed by René Descartes (1618-1648). Descartes launched the Enlightenment with the idea that truth is absolute and universal.^[16] According to him, to arrive at the truth, it is necessary to transcend the influences of culture and history and then – with a blank chalkboard in one’s mind – start a logical and scientific process that will take us to a timeless and changeless truth.^[17] This process also requires distance from the object of study to ensure objectivity. When this way of thinking influenced Protestantism, it made the Bible an object for rational analysis, producing a division between theological liberalism and theological conservatism.^[18]

Theological conservatism uses foundational realism as a hermeneutical lens. This would give one a sense of distance, objectivity, and the possibility of using reason by applying scientific methods to biblical texts to achieve verification. This theological method facilitated the emergence of fundamentalism and dispensationalism (present in Colombian Evangelicalism) by using inductive reasoning and scientific research to affirm the Bible’s inerrancy.^[19] “Foundational realists believe that a fixed body of absolute truths can be obtained provided that an inerrant Bible serves as the hermeneutical foundation from which to undertake the pursuit of truth,” affirms Robert Greer.^[20]

The mainline Protestant churches in Colombia, whose ecclesiology is oriented toward reason, tend to sustain their legitimacy by maintaining the doctrines of significant European reformers such as Luther and Calvin and defending their faith with philosophical arguments.^[21] Their liturgy is generally focused on studying Scripture, favoring textual exegesis.^[22] Here, the doctrinal and theoretical expressions of faith are paramount, more important than the practical aspects of pastoral care, ethics, and missions. When these practical themes are addressed, they are frequently associated with an emphasis on teaching. Pastoral work, for example, is understood primarily as the transmission of knowledge from the pastor to parishioners. Discipleship training for believers often focuses on instruction in dogma to maintain a “pure doctrine.” Counselling seeks to provide the “correct” answers to life’s problems, such as suffering, sexuality, and other complex themes. Christians must adopt an exact solution for their circumstance based on God’s objective revelation as expressed in the Bible. Not surprisingly, the Colombian churches that share this emphasis frequently ignore local celebrations and indigenous rhythms and expressions of worship, and they rarely attract uneducated people or people without an interest in academic matters.

Ecclesiologies of reason strongly emphasize apologetics in their missionary outreach methods. They present the gospel as a compilation of doctrines, each required to fit exactly in its place among the others. The missionary message tends to have an imperialistic tone because it is presented as if it were given by someone who holds the entire truth to someone else who lacks it.

Similarly, in terms of ethics, this approach tends to define boundaries based on the question: does the person I am encountering share precisely the same doctrines I hold? Thus, doctrines, rather than behavior, become the primary means for determining whether or not a person is a Christian.

In Colombia, where diversity and tolerance are not highly valued, and the cultural paradigm suggests that if two people do not agree with each other, they are automatically enemies, the use of the Bible as propositional revelation is not very helpful since it does not encourage diversity, pluralism, or reconciliation.^[23] When one understands the truth in propositional forms, assuming it is verifiable, it can easily lead to violence against other positions. As American historian John D. Roth explains, “claims to absolute certainty about faith – as expressed in carefully formulated systematic statements – could easily provide a rationale for condemning to hell all those who disagreed.”^[24]

When social service ministries exist in churches oriented around this focus, they generally do not profoundly impact social structures.^[25] In this model, as in the model based on experience, social change is understood to result primarily from changes in the lives of individual believers.^[26]

This model of doing church also ignores that beliefs and theology frequently emerge as a second step after the practice—as a reflection on experience. Theologian Miroslav Volf has explained this idea as follows:

People come to believe either because they find themselves already engaged in Christian practices (say, by being raised in a Christian home) or because they are attracted to them. In most cases, Christian practices come first and Christian beliefs follow—rather, beliefs are already entailed in practices, so that their explicit espousing becomes a matter of bringing to consciousness what is implicit in the engagement in practices themselves.^[27]

Moreover, ecclesiologies of reason further ignore that Colombian culture values relationships much more than written truths or laws. To the degree that this approach does not emphasize personal experience and a life with God but rather a rational and argumentative faith, many Colombians are not drawn to this sort of Christianity. This could be why mainline Protestant churches are not growing in Colombia as quickly as other denominations. The lack of vibrant experiences and significant relationships is a massive obstacle for Colombians who attempt to encounter God through this approach.

In contexts of oppression like Colombia, we do not need a system of truth that is based on a mentality of possession. Instead, truth understood as “testimony” is more relevant than dogma because it does not encourage oppression. It offers its message in the form of invitation rather than coercion. The gospel, as a Mennonite theologian has argued, “must then include a component of diversity, critique and conflict, not by accident or inadvertence or error, or bad manners, but by the nature of things. It will unmask idols. It will de-mythify the claim of any community of meaning to speak for the whole of humanity.”^[28]

“Pluralism as to epistemological method,” he continues, “is not a counsel of despair but part of the Good News. Ultimate validation is a matter not of a reasoning process […] but of the concrete social genuineness of the community’s reasoning together in the Spirit.”^[29]

In contrast to an ecclesiology of reason, this epistemological focus can help promote tolerance. Christian Early and Ted Grimsrud explain how that is “an approach that accepts relative powerlessness over against others […] The relevant element of Jesus’ way is his vulnerability, even to the point of his crucifixion.”^[30] Such a position could provide Colombians with a positive cultural alternative. If the churches in Colombia permit a range of opinions in their communities, they could model an alternative form of society. Indeed, a pacifist epistemology in a country like Colombia would point the way to true transformation.

Ecclesiologies of justice

In O’Collins’ typology, the second theological method privileges the search for justice. It finds its sources in the suffering of the poor and oppressed. In this approach, faith is understood as something you do for the benefit of others, as a solidaristic hope.^[31]

The truth is found in the community of the poor. Examples of this style are Liberation and Political Theologies. In political theologies, solidarity is concreted in what is called praxis. Praxis is a condition for the possibility of knowing God. It is understood as moral and social at the same time. Such praxis is ethically defined because of its opposition to apathy and its emphasis on solidarity with those who suffer. “Christ must always be thought in such a way that he is not just thought. For the sake of the truth that is proper to it, every Christology is nourished by a praxis: the praxis of discipleship. It expresses a knowledge that is essentially practical. In this sense every Christology stands under the primacy of praxis … only by following him [Jesus] do Christians know the one they have gotten involved with and the one who saves them,”^[32] explains Johannes Baptist Metz.

In the Colombian scene, this theological method translates into ecclesiologies described under the general headings of integral mission and liberation theologies, which can be classified as Political Theologies. In this presentation, we will focus more intentionally on liberation theologies. Among the various authors and theologies of liberation in Latin America, we will follow the theology of Peruvian Gustavo Gutiérrez because of his influence in Colombian churches that have opted for this theological style. We can mention here the following characteristics of his method:

1. Theology as second act:

“Contemplation and practice together make up a first act; theologizing is a second act.”^[33] With this sentence, Gutiérrez indicates his desire to do theology differently from the traditional method. For him, before speech is silence.^[34] However, silence or contemplation requires a base: a relationship with God where we listen and learn about God and the people and their suffering and struggles.^[35]

2. Praxis:

In Toward a Theology of Liberation, Gutiérrez writes: “Christian truth nevertheless has the particular character of being a truth that is thought but that first of all is done.”^[36] With this sentence, Gutiérrez rejected the traditional point of view that understands truth only in propositional terms. For him, the truth is fundamentally praxis.^[37]

3. Structural analysis:

Gutierrez declares, “It is not enough to describe the situation; its causes must also be determined.”^[38] He is concerned about the causes of the poverty (or death) of his brothers and sisters.^[39] In that analysis he has been accused of depending on Marxism and its sociological methodology. Some authors even question the current relevance of liberation theology due the failure of the communist narrative.^[40] In response to this critique, although Gutiérrez acknowledges his use of Marxist analysis, he shows how it is possible to arrive at the same conclusions without using Marxism.^[41]

4. Structural sin:

Related to the former topic is the concept of structural sin. For Gutiérrez, the structure itself is oppressive, although human beings are naturally responsible for these structures. According to him, we should not say too quickly that we can only change the structures by changing individual human beings: “Human behaviour is conditioned by the structures that human beings have created. It is a question, then, of simultaneous action on human beings and structures.”^[42]

5. The oppressed as locus of theology:

The communities of the poor have had an essential place in the thought of Gutiérrez about salvation. “The encounter with God takes place in the encounter with our neighbour; it is in the encounters with human beings that I encounter God,”^[43] he explains. However, this encounter with God doesn’t occur in just any community. He continues:

Our discourse on God cannot be separated from the everyday life of the poor of this world, a life infused with sorrow and hope. The experience of hunger and oppression changes our God-talk […] A theological language that does not reject unjust suffering, that does not speak out loud about the right of all to be happy, betrays the God of whom we speak.^[44]

Thus, the community of suffering and oppressed people is the place in which we are able to find God.^[45]

6. Preferential option for the poor:

As a logical consequence of the former point, an active solidarity with the poor is privileged.^[46] This does not mean that it is exclusive. “Every attempt at such an exclusive emphasis must be rejected,”^[47] declares Gutiérrez. Although love for the poor is the starting point for hope in the crisis,^[48] “the poor too have an obligation to [take] this option,”^[49] points out Gutiérrez.

7. Hermeneutical community:

In liberation theology, the subject of theological reflection is not the isolated theologian but the Christian community and the whole Church with its different charismas and responsibilities.^[50] Biblical interpretation cannot be done in isolation: “We read the Bible in the community of the followers of Christ, the church […] To read the Bible is to begin a dialogue between faith and faith, between the believers of the past and the believers of today: a dialogue that is taking place today within the ecclesial community as it pursues its pilgrimage through history,”^[51] affirms Gutiérrez.

8. Contextualization:

Gutiérrez accepts that human beings always believe in God in the context of a particular historical situation.^[52] “People today often talk about contextual theologies but, in point of fact, theology has always been contextual. Some theologies, it is true, may be more conscious of and explicit about their contextuality, but all theological investigation is necessarily carried out within a specific historical context,” ^[53] explains Gutiérrez. However, an excellent contextual theology, he continues, “will also deal with global issues, because Christian responsibility does not stop at the border.”^[54]

In contrast to an ecclesiology rooted in reason, understandings of the church that focus on justice – like liberation theologies – are very relevant in Colombia. In a country with so much inequality, the call for a balance between justice and economics is more than merely necessary – it is a Christian imperative. Thus, in the Colombian context, the strengths of an ecclesial focus on justice are clear, especially when we analyze liberation theologies: 1) its emphasis on praxis as the starting point for theology and its prioritizing of experience above theoretical knowledge makes this model very attractive for people who are looking for a new life and authentic values; 2) its focus on the poor and those who suffer highlights the importance of a gospel that is socially-engaged and prophetic; 3) it calls for a hermeneutic of obedience as a condition for understanding Scripture; and finally, 4) since an ecclesiology of justice emphasizes memory, it can help Colombians to remember the violence and injustices of their past and to work toward the transformation of these realities.

Nevertheless, we find several significant weaknesses in liberation theologies:

1. Liberation theologies sometimes lose the personal dimension of our relationship with God, even though relationships are extremely important in the Colombian context. Several theologians, like Gutiérrez, have tried integrating a spiritual emphasis in their work. However, liberation theology, as practiced in many churches with a liberal inclination in Colombia, tends to minimize the necessity of mystical or spiritual experiences.
2. Liberation theologies are often prisoners of the Constantinian synthesis because they assume that one can create justice simply by changing political structures. This approach presupposes the Christianization of the state through revolution. Yet the New Testament model focuses on local communities of believers where justice and equality are made possible by a personal and voluntary decision to follow Jesus.
3. In Colombia, this ecclesial model often emphasizes the rational foundations of socialist or Marxist positions.^[55] Despite an emphasis on praxis, Colombian churches that have adopted this approach generally borrow heavily from Marxist philosophy for the structural analysis and ideological platform that justifies their work. For example, several liberation theologians frequently use words or concepts in their sermons like “proletariat,” “historical dialectic,” and “means of production.” A significant part of this vocabulary requires an understanding of philosophy and socialist theory that sounds strange to most poor people in Colombia, many of whom have not had access to a formal education.

Liberation theologies do not engage our culture as successfully as the Pentecostal movements do in the context of an oral and visual culture like Colombia. Sometimes, philosophical reflection on praxis in liberation ecclesiologies is more critical than devotional practices, meaning this approach can be a bit “sterile” for Colombian culture.

4. Finally, an ecclesial model that seeks only justice without emphasizing forgiveness and reconciliation is irrelevant to Colombian realities. Indeed, it can even be destructive in our context of conflict and violence. This method places the pursuit of freedom and the struggle for justice at the very center of the Christian social agenda. In the words of Volf, this focus

is favored by more activist Christian groups that […] have effectively left the message of reconciliation to otherworldly “pietists” and taken up the pursuit of liberation as the most appropriate response to social problems. The process of reconciliation between persons and peoples, they believe, can commence only after liberation is accomplished; peace will be established only after justice is done.

The pursuit of liberation and the struggle for justice are indispensable; they are integral to Christian social responsibility. But if they are understood as tasks preceding the process of reconciliation and independent of it, rather than as indispensable aspects of a more overarching agenda of reconciliation, they are beset with two major problems.

First, designating liberation and justice as the primary categories of Christian social responsibility divorces the character of social engagement from the very center of the Christian faith—from the narrative of the cross of Christ, which reveals the character of the triune God […] Second, the primary stress on liberation is suited only to situations of manifest evil in which one side is unambiguously the victim—in the right—and the other unambiguously the perpetrator—therefore in the wrong. Most situations, however, are not so clean. Especially in conflicts with a longer history, each party, for good reasons, sees itself as the victim and perceives its rival as the perpetrator. As a consequence, each side can see itself as engaged in the struggle for liberation. If social responsibility is organized around liberation, the Christian faith ends up dangerously reducing the moral complexity of the situation and feeding into the self-righteousness of each party by assuring them that God is on their side.^[56]

Ecclesiologies of experience

In O’Collins’ typology, the third theological method emphasizes prayer and worship.  It finds its sources in the worshiping congregation and through public or private prayer. In this style, faith is understood as a personal relationship with God. The truth is found in the presence of God. Examples of this style are the modern Pentecostal and charismatic movements in Latin America. Other examples can be found within movements of some monastic orders in which God is known through mystical experiences and contemplation. Aesthetic expressions in liturgy, worship, and spiritual disciplines can also be placed here.

This method is one option for people uncomfortable with rationalistic theological approaches. “We move toward God not in conceiving him more clearly but in loving him more fully – through the religious and liturgical life that metaphysical concepts do not suffice to sustain or even to provoke,”^[57] explains Thomas Carlson. Here a free expression of our relationship with God is encouraged. As was mentioned before, it could be through art (music, poetry, painting, sculpture), spiritual disciplines, prayer, fasting, worship, or contemplation and silence. “There long have been Christian traditions recognizing the profound importance of mysticism and poetry, and the corresponding limitations of rationality and prose,”^[58] explains Brian McLaren.

This style of doing theology is the oldest among the three styles analyzed here. It has been helpful in pre-modern scenarios because it doesn’t presuppose reading or studying as necessary for the possibility of knowing God. Prose is replaced here by art, study by devotion, and technique by improvisation.

Because this style is related directly to cultural expressions, it has the power to form concepts and ideas about God deeply. Maybe that is one of the reasons why the Bible contains more poetry than prose. Hans Urs von Balthasar points out: “God needs prophets in order to make himself known, and all prophets are necessarily artistic. What a prophet has to say can never be said in prose.”^[59] Art more easily captures people’s hearts and transforms their way of thinking. This explains why church history is coloured by using art throughout her existence. W. A. Dyrness explains about aesthetics:

From the Christian point of view, objects that artists made were most often destined for use in the liturgy or later as objects stimulating personal or familiar devotion. The practices of making and using art were understood mostly as theological practices—they could stimulate prayer, connect one with spiritual power or serve as vessels for relics or sanctified elements […] Music and art can capture much of the natural wisdom of a culture and be a kind of indirect witness to the truth of the gospel.^[60]

Additionally, this style has a pastoral and therapeutic component. “Faced with tragic personal losses, Christians naturally reach for symbols rather than ‘rational’ explanations,”^[61] affirms O’Collins. Societies with high levels of suffering are more open to this style than to styles that respond to their needs with intellectual theories.

Numerically, this form of being the church has been the most successful in Colombia. The Pentecostal movements have become the country’s second most important religious force after the Roman Catholic Church.^[62] Because this approach emphasizes personal experience and relationships with a living God much more than written norms, groups structured around ecclesiologies of experience have experienced the most rapid growth.

However, like the other approaches, it also brings with it some problems:

1. Marketing strategies have given this movement a consumerist flavor. Ecclesiologies of experience promote an individualistic gospel that offers Colombians an escape from their context of violence and suffering. In the words of Jaime Laurence Bonilla, the response to suffering and the needs of others is often indifference.^[63] With few exceptions, the mega-churches that promote this model do not have social service projects or provide support for poor people.^[64]
2. The quest for social justice is almost absent in most churches structured around an ecclesiology of experience. They do not tend to preach the necessity of changing our present reality in light of a future that God reveals as God’s will for the human race. The primary change they promise is immediate financial success, often in a very individualistic way, without the possibility of a holistic new beginning for the Christian community based on the new creation. This ecclesiology lacks the Christian hope that Jürgen Moltmann defined as a refusal to accept “things as they happen to stand or to lie, but as progressing, moving things with possibilities of change.”^[65] As a result, many of these churches support the current dominant political system.^[66] A prophetic voice gets reduced here to predicting the future and to moralistic messages against, for example, abortion or sexuality.
3. Finally, this style’s robust and personal leadership emphasizes Colombian caudillismo, an authoritarian model that ignores the biblical concept of a servant-leader. These congregations encourage a theology of glory in which God is identified with the powerful and Latin American authoritarian caudillo. Leaders are regarded as holding a privileged position before God, which makes them untouchable – criticism of leaders is unacceptable. Indeed, the hierarchical structures are so strong that they often resemble military models of absolute obedience.^[67] As a consequence, anarchy and fragmentation have been common in these movements since people frequently leave these churches because of their negative experiences with authoritarian leaders.

In this approach, liturgy primarily focuses on emotional expression, drawing especially on contextualized musical forms. Modern and indigenous rhythms mix and find joyful expression in a style that young people find highly attractive.^[68] The reason is suspect because personal experience is more important than theoretical knowledge. “Feeling the presence of the Holy Spirit” is more important than learning systematic doctrine.^[69] Thus, Bible study is generally not based on careful exegesis of the text but rather on the inner light that the Spirit gives to each individual.^[70] This way of thinking has led some groups in Colombia to take extreme positions in which they ignore the Bible altogether or interpret the Bible with such a degree of subjectivity that it puts some of these groups beyond traditional understandings of the Christian faith.

The financial needs and the urgency of immediate solutions have led many churches that practice this style to promote a so-called “prosperity gospel” – a gospel that preaches a consumerist kind of Christianity in which God is present primarily to provide the material necessities of church members. Thus, God’s presence in an individual is measured in these churches by his or her capacity to consume. For that reason, these churches share with Colombian consumerist society the same objectives in life, such as having a nice car, fine clothes, and an excellent education.^[71] Lamentably, Vernard Eller’s observations are a sad reality in many Colombian churches:

How many contemporary Christians have become members of churches without any serious thought of serving the church or God in and through his church, but simply because a particular congregation holds the promise of providing an interesting group of people with whom to identify, of presenting interesting and exciting programs, of offering various services to assist their efforts in becoming beautiful persons?^[72]

Churches with an ecclesiology of experience have seen tremendous numerical growth in Colombia. Yet, as we have already noted, when this form of ecclesiology is applied without a biblical foundation, it can privilege a theology of glory. If Jesus and his way of life are not at the center, forms of prayer, worship, and a view of God can quickly emerge that do not reflect the God revealed to humanity in the person of Jesus Christ.

According to Barth, whenever Christianity is based strictly on the religious experiences of humans, the question emerges as to whether religion becomes a purely human phenomenon and God a mere human projection.^[73] As John Hall asserts, “Neither nature nor rationality nor experience leads the soul to conclude that the Absolute is merciful.”^[74] Yet the God who is revealed in Jesus Christ is astonishingly compassionate. A revealed God rescues us from our egocentric, self-centred, and consumerist way of living and resituates us in a life of renunciation, forgiveness, and love for the well-being of our communities, societies, and enemies.

Toward a relevant ecclesiology

The French philosopher Gilles Lipovetsky has described our current context with penetrating clarity. These days, he writes, “one is a believer, but a la carte – maintaining one doctrine, eliminating another; mixing the Gospels with the Koran, Zen or Buddhism; spirituality is located in a kaleidoscopic age of supermarkets and self-service.”^[75] The dominant contemporary models of ecclesiology pressure us to copy the worship styles, strategies, and methodologies that have brought “success” to other Christian movements, even if that means sacrificing Anabaptist principles.

The temptation to adapt our concept and practice of the church to these current ecclesiological streams is not new. However, in our global communion, the Mennonite World Conference, we find ecclesial practices that reflect a different style of being church, a style that is coherent with our Anabaptist tradition. That style takes some components of the ecclesiologies described here, redefines them and integrates them in a way that offers a new, inspiring and invigorating alternative.

NOTES

^[1] Cf. Semana, Cristianos: La Otra Silla de la Negociación. https://www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/cristianismo-se-suma-a-la-nueva-mesa-de-negociacion-de-los-acuerdos-de-paz-con-las-farc/498457 (accessed Nov. 23, 2019).

^[2] I presented this story at the 2018 Council of International Anabaptist Ministries (CIM) consultation. That presentation was published in César García, “The Mission of God and Global Partnerships: Lessons from the Past, Possibilities for the Future,” Anabaptist Witness 5, no. 2 (2018).

^[3] Cf. Gerald O’Collins, Retrieving Fundamental Theology: The Three Styles of Contemporary Theology (New York: Paulist Press, 1993), 9-13.

^[4] Cf. Dorothee Sölle, Thinking About God: An Introduction to Theology (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 1990), 7-21. In the case of Latin American authors, see the work of José Míguez Bonino, Faces of Latin American Protestantism: 1993 Carnahan Lectures (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1997). and Justo L. González, Christian Thought Revisited: Three Types of Theology, Rev. ed. (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1999).

^[5] Cf. Christian Thought Revisited: Three Types of Theology, Kindle Loc. 323.

^[6] Portions of what follows originally appeared in César García, “The Relevance, Validity, and Urgency of Anabaptism for Our Time: Contemporary Ecclesiological Currents in Latin American Christianity,” Mennonite Quarterly Review LXXXVIII, no. 4 (2014): 451-66.

^[7] Cf. Gerald O’Collins, Rethinking Fundamental Theology: Toward a New Fundamental Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 323.

^[8] Alister E. McGrath, Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought, (Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2023). 6.

^[9] Cf. Karl Rahner and Raúl Gabás Pallás, Curso Fundamental Sobre La Fe: Introducción Al Concepto De Cristianismo (Barcelona: Herder, 1979), 30.

^[10] Cf. Louis Berkhof, Teología Sistemática: Con Un Índice Textual Completo, 8th ed. (Jenison [USA]: T.E.L.L., 1988).

^[11] Emil Brunner and Karl Barth, Natural Theology: Comprising “Nature and Grace” by Emil Brunner and the Reply “No!” by Karl Barth (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 2002), 78-79.

^[12] The work of Andrés Torres Queiruga has been promoted in Colombia by the Catholic theologian Olvani Sánchez Hernández. See Olvani Fernando Sánchez Hernández, Qué Significa Afirmar Que Dios Habla? Del Acontecer De La Revelación a La Elaboración De La Teología (Bogotá: Editorial Bonaventuriana, 2007).

^[13] Cf. Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction, 25th Anniversary 6th ed. (Chichester, West Sussex; Malden, Mass.: Wiley, Blackwell, 2017), 113.

^[14] Cf. Ibid., 114.

^[15] Ignace de la Potterie, “History and Truth,” in René Latourelle, Gerald O’Collins, and Matthew J. O’Connell, Problems and Perspectives of Fundamental Theology (New York: Paulist Press, 1982), 91.

^[16] Cf. Robert Greer, Mapping Postmodernism: A Survey of Christian Options (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 30-31.

^[17] Cf. Ibid., 33.

^[18] Cf. Ibid., 34-38.

^[19] Cf. Ibid., 38-39.

^[20] Ibid., 85.

^[21] Cf. Ana María Bidegaín Greising and Juan Diego Demera Vargas, Globalización Y Diversidad Religiosa En Colombia (Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas, 2005), 258.

^[22] Cf. Ibid., 260.

^[23] Cf. Germán Puyana, ¿Cómo Somos?: Los Colombianos: Reflexiones Sobre Nuestra Idiosincrasia Y Cultura, 3. ed. (Bogotá: Panamericana, 2005), 63.

^[24] John D. Roth, Beliefs: Mennonite Faith and Practice (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 2005), 30-31.

^[25] Cf. William Mauricio Beltran Cely, De Microempresas Religiosas a Multinacionales De La Fe: La Diversificación Del Cristianismo En Bogotá (Bogotá: Universidad de San Buenaventura, 2006), 291.

^[26] Cf. Ibid., 292.

^[27] Miroslav Volf, Captive to the Word of God: Engaging the Scriptures for Contemporary Theological Reflection (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2010), 52-53.

^[28] John Howard Yoder, Christian E. Early, and Ted Grimsrud, A Pacifist Way of Knowing: John Howard Yoder’s Nonviolent Epistemology (Eugene, Ore.: Cascade Books, 2010), 52.

^[29] Ibid., 88.

^[30] Ibid., 152-53.

^[31] Cf. Johannes Baptist Metz and James Matthew Ashley, Faith in History and Society: Toward a Practical Fundamental Theology (New York: Crossroad Pub. Co., 2007), 81.

^[32] Ibid., 62.

^[33] Gustavo Gutiérrez, On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1987), xiii.

^[34] Cf. Ibid.

^[35] Cf. Gutiérrez, The Density of the Present: Selected Writings, 171.

^[36] Gustavo Gutiérrez, “Toward a Theology of Liberation” in Alfred T. Hennelly, Liberation Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1990), 65.

^[37] Cf. Gustavo Gutiérrez, The Density of the Present: Selected Writings (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1999), 205.

^[38] Gustavo Gutiérrez, Caridad Inda, and John Eagleson, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1988), xxiii.

^[39] Cf. Ibid., xxv.

^[40] Cf. Christian Smith, “Las Casas as Theological Counteroffensive: An Interpretation of Gustavo Gutiérrez’s Las Casas: In Search of the Poor of Jesus Christ,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41, no. 1 (2002): 72.

^[41] Cf. Ibid., 71.

^[42] Gustavo Gutiérrez, “Toward a Theology of Liberation” in Hennelly, Liberation Theology: A Documentary History, 70.

^[43] Ibid., 74.

^[44] Gutiérrez, The Density of the Present: Selected Writings, 193-94.

^[45] Cf. Gutiérrez, On Job: God-talk and the Suffering of the Innocent: 48.

^[46] Cf. Gutiérrez, Inda, and Eagleson, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation, xxvii.

^[47] Ibid., xxvi.

^[48] Cf. James B. Nickoloff, “A Future for Peru: Gustavo Gutiérrez and the Reasons for His Hope,” Horizons 19, no. 1 (1992): 34.

^[49] Gutiérrez, Inda, and Eagleson, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation, xxvi.

^[50] Cf. Gutiérrez, The Density of the Present: Selected Writings, 172.

^[51] Gutiérrez, The God of Life  (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1991), xvi.

^[52] Cf. Ibid., xv.

^[53] Daniel Hartnett, “Remembering the Poor,” America 188, no. 3 (2003): 13.

^[54] Ibid., 16.

^[55] Cf. Jean-Pierre Bastian, “Pentecostalismos Latinoamericanos: Lógicas de Mercado y Transnacionalización religiosa,” in Bidegaín Greising and Demera Vargas, Globalización Y Diversidad Religiosa En Colombia, 341.

^[56] Miroslav Volf, “The Social Meaning of Reconciliation,” Interpretation: A Journal of Bible & Theology 54, no. 2 (2000): 162-63.

^[57] Thomas A. Carlson, “Postmetaphysical Theology,” in Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, Cambridge Companions to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 61.

^[58] Brian D. McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I Am a Missional, Evangelical, Post/Protestant, Liberal/Conservative, Mystical/Poetic, Biblical, Charismatic/Contemplative, Fundamentalist/Calvinist, Anabaptist/Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, Green, Incarnational, Depressed-yet-Hopeful, Emergent, Unfinished Christian (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2004), 151.

^[59] Hans Urs von Balthasar cited by McLaren, ibid., 147.

^[60] W. A. Dyrness, “Art and Aesthetics: A Western Framework,” in William A. Dyrness and Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Global Dictionary of Theology: A Resource for the Worldwide Church (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2008), 67-69.

^[61] O’Collins, Retrieving Fundamental Theology: The Three Styles of Contemporary Theology, 105.

^[62] Cf. Beltran Cely, De Microempresas Religiosas a Multinacionales De La Fe: La Diversificación Del Cristianismo En Bogotá, 62.

^[63] Cf. Jaime Laurence Bonilla, “Teología de la Prosperidad, Neoliberalismo y Esperanza Cristiana,” in Andrés Eduardo González Santos, Memorias Del Primer Congreso Internacional “Diversidad Y Dinámicas Del Cristianismo En América Latina.” (Bogotá: Editorial Bonaventuriana, 2007), 153.

^[64] Cf. Beltran Cely, De Microempresas Religiosas a Multinacionales De La Fe: La Diversificación Del Cristianismo En Bogotá, 190.

^[65] Jürgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 25.

^[66] Cf. Alvaro Cepeda van Houten, Clientelismo Y Fe: Dinámicas Políticas Del Pentecostalismo En Colombia (Bogotá: Universidad de San Buenaventura, 2007), 17.

^[67] Cf. Beltran Cely, De Microempresas Religiosas a Multinacionales De La Fe: La Diversificación Del Cristianismo En Bogotá, 199.

^[68] Cf. Ibid., 19.

^[69] Cf. Bidegaín Greising and Demera Vargas, Globalización Y Diversidad Religiosa En Colombia, 269-72.

^[70] Cf. Ibid., 266. As Kevin Vanhoozer has put it, “Mysticism errs in not saying enough. Mystics assume (rightly) that humans are unable in and of themselves adequately to put ‘God’ into words. Mystics also assume (wrongly) that God does not put himself into words”; Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and Authorship, Cambridge Studies in Christian Doctrine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 471-72.

^[71] Cf. Bidegaín Greising and Demera Vargas, Globalización Y Diversidad Religiosa En Colombia, 277.

^[72] Vernard Eller, The Outward Bound: Caravaning as the Style of the Church (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1980), 36.

^[73] Karl Barth cited by Nancey Murphy and Brad J. Kallenberg, “Anglo-American Postmodernity,” in Vanhoozer, The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology, 30.

^[74] Douglas John Hall, The Cross in Our Context: Jesus and the Suffering World (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 23.

^[75] Gilles Lipovetsky, “Modernismo y Postmodernismo,” in Fernando Viviescas Monsalve, Fabio Giraldo, and Jürgen Habermas, Colombia: El Despertar De La Modernidad (Santafé de Bogotá: Foro Nacional por Colombia, 1991), 142.

Bibliography

Beltran Cely, William Mauricio. De Microempresas Religiosas a Multinacionales De La Fe: La Diversificación Del Cristianismo En Bogotá. Bogotá: Universidad de San Buenaventura, 2006.

Berkhof, Louis. Teología Sistemática: Con Un Índice Textual Completo. 8 ed. Jenison (USA): T.E.L.L., 1988.

Bidegaín Greising, Ana María, and Juan Diego Demera Vargas. Globalización Y Diversidad Religiosa En Colombia. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas, 2005.