Postmodernism: Part One

As I began reading Stanley J. Grenz’s book, A Primer on Postmodernism, there are a few key points that I believe are worth noting. Grenz lays out postmodernism as a current shift in Western culture characterized by some key concepts:
a) there is not one transcendent meaning in the world; instead of an objective world view there are different views encountered by different people
b) human intellect (the human mind) is no longer the authority of truth; instead, there is a community based understanding of truth
c) the postmodern ethos has no real center; instead, a spirit of bricolage and diversity is more common

Although these concepts represent only a few of the shifts found in postmodernism, I would argue that there are some distinct parallels between these concepts and those that affect ecclesiology.
Grenz discusses that postmodern philosophy disregards the idea that an individual can relate to the world without a consideration for independent existence (p.40). He notes that most of us “assume that the world is objectively real,” yet the postmodern mind takes on a constructionist view in which we are responsible for constructing the world in which we live, by bringing our own concepts and experiences to the forefront. This concept speaks to Stuart Murray’s writings in Post-Christendom. Murray notes that post-Christendom is a move away from the familiarity of the Christian narrative. These two spheres share common ground in that different groups will encounter different stories about the world, or about Christianity, that reflect a context full of personal experiences. As people move away from a central world view, or Christian meta-narrative, the search for a grand meaning or a unified humanity (as the creation of God) becomes less penetrating.

For the postmodern, truth is more than just a postulation of human reason and the human mind, it can be an emotional and intuitive process (p.7). For this reason there is a disregard for human knowledge as purely objective and a bend towards accepting communal truth, because of our dependence upon that very community in which we participate. This connection between truth and community is crucial to ecclesiology, and relates to Andrew Walker’s discussion in Deep Church about the spiritual formation of individuals in relation to one another. Walker argues that we have turned the spiritual formation process into an individual journey, and should remained focus on being “joined to one another in Christ.” If the nature of truth is related to our sense of community (as argued by postmodernism), what does this mean for ministry in the future? Will there by a growing dependence on one another for spiritual growth? Should community become more of an arbiter of truth, rather than the individual (and the mind) behind the pulpit?

Finally, Grenz also discusses the comfort with which postmoderns “[mix] elements of what have traditionally been considered incompatible belief systems” (p.15). Grenz specifically speaks of bricolage (a la Vincent Miller) and the similarities are striking. The eclecticism found in postmodernism mirrors the bricolage which Miller, in his book Consuming Religion, discusses as a system in which elements/objects of tradition are displaced from their original contexts. In postmodernism this is understood as an attempt to diversify, and create a collage which denies the power of singular authorship. What does this mean for the church? If the patterns of bricolage, which are found in religion, are considered a celebration of diversity in the postmodern mind, how does the church react to this? To what extent should the church accept this diversity?
This shift in culture will present new issues for the church and I hope to gain deeper understanding as I continue reading.