A Conversation with Robert Jensen

bycal -- Jesus is alive only if we make it so through words, deeds, and actions. A pietistic faith that proudly proclaims a belief in the Nicene Creed, declaring that all who fall short of an Orthodox belief system cannot really call themselves Christian, misses the point of what Jesus was really all about. I know I am not in the mainstream, but I am taken aback at the level of hostility expressed to Professor Jensen and all others who do not share the pietistic, conventional point of view. I do believe some re-thinking needs to occur, because while it may be true that a Christianity that doesn't recognize "that Jesus is indeed alive today . . . however 'progressive' it may claim to be, is not worth bothering with," the same is true in reverse. A Christianity focused on nothing more than "I believe, therefore I am saved" is, as you stated, "not worth bothering with," if it results in bigotry, intolerance, and injustice (something which has afflicted many, many so-called Christians over the centuries). So, personally, I prefer a progressive Christianity that struggles with doctrine but strives for a just world over a theologically certain, one-size-fits-all version that allows no doubters or dissenters.

bycal -- Now I am confused. First, I said nothing about pragmatism, my argument is with pietism. Second, I do not accept much of the orthodoxy of the Christian church, but am suggesting that orthodox Christians (those professing belief in a Triune God in the manner you profess -- which I respect and am fine with, for you) need to be more accepting of those who may not share their absolutist beliefs. Thus, as I said above, I am surprised at the level of hostility expressed toward Professor Jensen in many of these comments. I want to excommunicate no one -- just want to avoid being excommunicated myself, simply because I have a broader and less literal view of the Gospels. Peace/shalom.

mjeinpenn: "There has to be room for thinkers and doubters in the Christian faith, otherwise Christianity will eventually fade away into irrelevancy."

There certainly is room for thinkers and doubters within the Christian fold. All of us entertain doubts at one time or another. Yet it is quite another thing to ascribe normative status to these doubts. The mere fact that we have difficulty understanding the resurrection of Jesus does not mean it didn't happen. As Christians we bow before the Word of God and humbly accept his revelation of himself to us, always seeking to find our own place within the biblical narrative. "I do believe. Help my unbelief!"

As I read him, Jensen is doing much more than to confess his doubts in humility. He is rather asserting that he simply does not believe the cardinal tenets of the faith, yet he goes to church anyway, apparently for social and political reasons. I am glad he attends church. We properly welcome those who come to church even if their motives are wrong. I hope and pray that, through habitual attendance, he will indeed meet, believe and find joy in the risen Christ and yield his life to him in all its fullness.

mjeinpenn again: "The beauty of progressive Christianity, despite its doctrinal ambiguity, is the emphasis on creating and working for a more just, loving society -- the type of society that Jesus would work for if he were alive today."

The church has the joyful privilege of announcing that Jesus is indeed alive today. A Christianity that doesn't recognize this, however "progressive" it may claim to be, is not worth bothering with.

Mjeinpenn, I hate to break it to you, but pragmatism is every bit the belief system that Christianity is. It has its own orthodoxy, and those professing it, such as yourself, appear ready to excommunicate those of us who don't buy it. St. James said that faith without works is dead; he definitely did not say that faith doesn't matter as long as you do good works.

The late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus said that, where orthodoxy is optional, it will eventually be proscribed, -- something that has been demonstrated time and again in so many church bodies. The god of pragmatism is a jealous god, and dressing it up in the language of progressive Christianity does nothing to mitigate this reality. By contrast, the church has always confessed that the Triune God deserves worship because of who he is, namely, God, and because of who we are, namely, his image-bearers.

I am the first to recognize and urge that Christianity has profound social and political implications. I too would call myself a "progressive Christian" (although I am exceedingly reluctant to accept all of what the larger society labels progress). But let's put first things first. The love of neighbor flows out of the love of God; it's not a substitute for it.

bycal -- Now I am confused. First, I said nothing about pragmatism, my argument is with pietism. Second, I do not accept much of the orthodoxy of the Christian church, but am suggesting that orthodox Christians (those professing belief in a Triune God in the manner you profess -- which I respect and am fine with, for you) need to be more accepting of those who may not share their absolutist beliefs. Thus, as I said above, I am surprised at the level of hostility expressed toward Professor Jensen in many of these comments. I want to excommunicate no one -- just want to avoid being excommunicated myself, simply because I have a broader and less literal view of the Gospels. Peace/shalom.

My hope is to spark a discussion about what it means to be a "Christian" as Dr. Jensen is by no means the only one who shares these views. What role does one's beliefs and actions play in defining who we are as followers of Jesus?

Becky G.

First--thank you for responding to the question so as to contribute to a stronger discussion.

I have never understood why liberal Christianity has any interest in the Jesus story. Why attempt to find great meaning and wisdom in what one considers meaningless? Why call it Christianity (e.g. "We are keepers of a rich religion we have designed on the back of a crazy orthodoxy.")
Why confuse the spirituality of a progressive religion with a primitive tribal myth?

Why do people find a little/invisible Jesus to be so interesting?

I am not sure you can say this a Christian blog .Many political views are supported by God Fearing Christians , , but they all seem grounded in I am a better Christian then you are therefore loosing much of their ability to unify with all believers , A Christian blog would have Christ at the head of it , not a political beleif system. . Not much for unity of the church , but more for a political unity for belief systems that believe liberal politics are superior and more helpful.

But say In California , religious conservatives grouped together with Mormons who have a different definition of who Jesus is also to stop gay marriage.

Thank you for this article Becky-- the conversation does much to illuminate how progressive Christians frame their understanding of the Christian faith. I think the term "Christianity" can no longer contain the many diverse relationships different groups have with Jesus/God/the Bible-- "Christianities" is more appropriate, I guess. Robert Jensen defines Christianity differently than I do-- from my definition of what a Christian is, he has a different faith from mine-- but I respect his faith and belief system just as I would any other religion.
Going sort of O/T, Becky (and indeed any other regular Sojo contributors) if you are reading this I would be interested to know what you think-- as Jesse3 has pondered-- is it possible to be politically progressive but theologically conservative? Or rather, how? I agree with jesse3 that unfortunately there are very few models for theologically conservative Christians to follow in terms of being politically progressive. It's easy for theologically liberal Christians to be politically progressive because their belief system does not come into conflict with their politics. For the theologically moderate or conservative, we have more to work out and consider before coming to the same conclusions. Those who are theologically conservative have been branded and ignorant and unthinking when in fact, when trying to engage in progressive politics it requires so much more effort, struggle and prayer on their part. I appreciate Sojo's work in highlighting all these issues and presenting a different kind of Christianity that creates change in the here and now, but I would also be interested in Sojo leading the way in showing the theologically conservative that progressive politics need not come in conflict with their belief system; taking their belief systems into consideration rather than just presenting a laundry list of what theological conservatives should not do.

Thanks for advancing conversation!

I think Sojo has led the way. I tend to think it be all too simple. Evangelicals who chose to LIVE in a place and a way that confronted them with issues of money/poverty and power/justice--in the course of their lives and relationships.

Very simplistically I believe conservatives have the right answers and progressives have the right questions. I don't totally believe that--but in regards to why the two can't get along--I think it largely true.

Right answers are meaningless if one is locked into the wrong questions. Engaging important questions while decimating the foundational basis of any meaningful answers is also quite meaningless.

How to solve it. Relationships marked by love and a mutual submission to our Lord in which we live out the questions and answers.

My hope is to spark a discussion about what it means to be a "Christian" as Dr. Jensen is by no means the only one who shares these views. What role does one's beliefs and actions play in defining who we are as followers of Jesus?

Becky G.

First--thank you for responding to the question so as to contribute to a stronger discussion.

I have never understood why liberal Christianity has any interest in the Jesus story. Why attempt to find great meaning and wisdom in what one considers meaningless? Why call it Christianity (e.g. "We are keepers of a rich religion we have designed on the back of a crazy orthodoxy.")
Why confuse the spirituality of a progressive religion with a primitive tribal myth?

Why do people find a little/invisible Jesus to be so interesting?

I am not sure you can say this a Christian blog .Many political views are supported by God Fearing Christians , , but they all seem grounded in I am a better Christian then you are therefore loosing much of their ability to unify with all believers , A Christian blog would have Christ at the head of it , not a political beleif system. . Not much for unity of the church , but more for a political unity for belief systems that believe liberal politics are superior and more helpful.

But say In California , religious conservatives grouped together with Mormons who have a different definition of who Jesus is also to stop gay marriage.

Thank you for this article Becky-- the conversation does much to illuminate how progressive Christians frame their understanding of the Christian faith. I think the term "Christianity" can no longer contain the many diverse relationships different groups have with Jesus/God/the Bible-- "Christianities" is more appropriate, I guess. Robert Jensen defines Christianity differently than I do-- from my definition of what a Christian is, he has a different faith from mine-- but I respect his faith and belief system just as I would any other religion.
Going sort of O/T, Becky (and indeed any other regular Sojo contributors) if you are reading this I would be interested to know what you think-- as Jesse3 has pondered-- is it possible to be politically progressive but theologically conservative? Or rather, how? I agree with jesse3 that unfortunately there are very few models for theologically conservative Christians to follow in terms of being politically progressive. It's easy for theologically liberal Christians to be politically progressive because their belief system does not come into conflict with their politics. For the theologically moderate or conservative, we have more to work out and consider before coming to the same conclusions. Those who are theologically conservative have been branded and ignorant and unthinking when in fact, when trying to engage in progressive politics it requires so much more effort, struggle and prayer on their part. I appreciate Sojo's work in highlighting all these issues and presenting a different kind of Christianity that creates change in the here and now, but I would also be interested in Sojo leading the way in showing the theologically conservative that progressive politics need not come in conflict with their belief system; taking their belief systems into consideration rather than just presenting a laundry list of what theological conservatives should not do.

Thanks for advancing conversation!

I think Sojo has led the way. I tend to think it be all too simple. Evangelicals who chose to LIVE in a place and a way that confronted them with issues of money/poverty and power/justice--in the course of their lives and relationships.

Very simplistically I believe conservatives have the right answers and progressives have the right questions. I don't totally believe that--but in regards to why the two can't get along--I think it largely true.

Right answers are meaningless if one is locked into the wrong questions. Engaging important questions while decimating the foundational basis of any meaningful answers is also quite meaningless.

How to solve it. Relationships marked by love and a mutual submission to our Lord in which we live out the questions and answers.

bycal -- Now I am confused. First, I said nothing about pragmatism, my argument is with pietism. Second, I do not accept much of the orthodoxy of the Christian church, but am suggesting that orthodox Christians (those professing belief in a Triune God in the manner you profess -- which I respect and am fine with, for you) need to be more accepting of those who may not share their absolutist beliefs. Thus, as I said above, I am surprised at the level of hostility expressed toward Professor Jensen in many of these comments. I want to excommunicate no one -- just want to avoid being excommunicated myself, simply because I have a broader and less literal view of the Gospels. Peace/shalom.

I don't believe the bible is to be read or understood literally?

The Resurrection has nothing to believing the resurrection occurred because of a literal understanding . . Most mainstream churches had you memorize the following creed , it was meant as a basic outline that joined believers . Not believing in the resurrection is one thing , advocating that belief I would expect some criticism at least .
You sound like you believe Jesus was a "nice guy" and we should follow him Him and that would be enough . That is fine , but it is not the Christianity Christ taught . In fact he was not always the "nice guy" if you study the scriptures and go past your literal understanding of the nice guy Jesus , you will perhaps see my point at least , we tend to see Jesus words from a more literal understanding by our culture .But He talked about hell , going to hell, he called his disciples stupid , he defied the church at the time and their cultural norms , remember the Pharisees talked about the goodness of God also . The Lord Conquered death , and through the Holy Spirit we have been empowered to be like Jesus . To do the things you said to be like the nice guy Jesus you sound as if it is because your a better person . I am not sure if you meant it that way , but I too wish to be like Jesus , because of the resurrection I have hope I can be , He gives me strength , right now i may mow the lawn for my neighbor once ina while , give generously to the poor , try to comfort friends and unbelievers with the Love of God He allows into me through Christ . But The Lord says wid we would greater things then He did on earth , and saying the deciples lied about the resurection , Apostle Paul and other , well you think saying the words of jesus and the Bible lying is OK in your kind of Christianity . Your the one who took the cross and seem to make your ability to be a nice guy as something more important . Oh no , if it was not for the Cross , I would have no hope in ever being as good of a person as you , that alone Christ.

The Nicene Creed
We believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth of all that is seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through Him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried.

On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son He is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen