In Chapter Eleven of Fortress Introduction to Contemporary Theologies, the writers introduce a female theologian, who states that “the more one becomes a feminist the more difficult it becomes to go to church”.  I can see why.  Much like other institutions such as governments, the church is largely dominated by males, and in the past, the church had many grave missteps that alienated women from participating.  The author talks about “women church”, where women gather in living rooms and exorcise texts that are patriarchal to the extreme.  Rosemary Radforth Ruether is one theologian from whom women church has been greatly influenced by.  Ruether’s father died when she was twelve, and so her mother became her sole influence.  Ruether became caught up in the civil rights movements in the 1960s.  In 1965 she went down to Mississippi and worked at a child development group.  She then moved to Washington D.C. and taught at the School of Religion at Howard University, all the while embracing feminism, civil rights, and environmentalism. 

            Ruether writes that all women share one thing in common, their oppression by male dominated society.  She points to the history of the Christian church as a prime example of man’s subjugation of women.  It is impossible to deny that throughout history, society has taken advantage of women in innumerable ways.  It is especially shameful that the Church has done the same.  The earthly institution that houses Christianity should be a place where everyone is equal in God’s eyes.  Unfortunately, the Church is an institution, full of human error, prejudice, and cruelty.  I think that society as a whole has definitely grown better throughout the ages.  In America, on paper women and men are equal.  Unfortunately there is still a gap in income and other problems, but as a nation we have made great strides.  I hope that the Church can separate itself from secular institutions and become a place where equality truly exists.

Chapter 8 of Fortress Introduction to Contemporary Theologies starts off describing a German soldier captured as a prisoner of war by the British in 1945.  Interned in POW camps in Belgium and Scotland for three years, this prisoner discovered Christ and a renewed faith in Christianity, claiming that this faith saved both his soul and his physical well being.  This man, Jurgen Moltmann, would later become a famous theologian.  I like Moltmann’s words on his psyche during his time at the prisoner camps.  He talked of the absence of hope and how devastating such a state of mind is.  Indeed, this life is full of suffering, but hope offers us a promise of salvation, either in this world or the next.  Though as Christians we know the promise of eternal life in Christ, it is nonetheless extremely difficult at times here on earth when all hope seems lost.  On the flip side, Moltmann writes, hope can urge one to not be satisfied with one’s current position, and desire to change things for the better.  This is certainly not a negative.  One of mankind’s greatest abilities is that of daring to improve society by not being satisfied with the current state of things. 

            Another theologian, Ernst Bloch utilized a form of theology incorporating theology and the idea that humans are instinctively hopeful.  Bloch influenced Moltmann and his theology greatly.  However, as an atheist, Bloch’s idea of hope did not sit well with Moltmann, and I agree.  How can one subscribe to hope when one believes that there is no true goal in sight?  As Moltmann writes, Boch’s theology turns the struggle of life and hoping for the future into an endless “on and on”, with no resolution.   It almost surprises me that Boch is so passionate about hope, when he believes that his story will end at his grave.

            

In Chapter 3, “Jesus Christ and Mythology” in Contemporary Theologies, the writers strive to underline the ways in which we analyze the bible.  The historical-critical approach is a method of interpreting the bible which has been improved since the eighteenth century.  This type of criticism involves analyzing the bible in the same light that one would interpret other literature.  An offshoot of this is “form criticism” which was introduced in the 1920s and ‘30s.  Form criticism recognizes the fact that literature is saturated with traditions and culture which, in some cases, can make the truth difficult to pick up.  Form criticism is mainly concerned with striving to uncover the original meaning of the work by reading past the superimposed traditions interwoven in the text. 

The author notes an interesting point, that by using form criticism, readers not only uncover the true meaning of the literature in a historical sense, but that one can also better understand the early church traditions by seeking to separate said traditions from the writing.  This style of criticism is often used in analyzing the New Testament.  The Synoptics are especially good targets I assume because of their more literal writing style compared to the Gospel of John.

While many new methods of analyzing the bible emerged, none were quite as impactful as form criticism.  I can see the importance that form criticism offers in the reading of the bible.  Form criticism is such a useful tool in discerning the true nature of the meaning behind the word of God.  Just like Gnosticism preaches the existence of some secret truth that is uncovered by the knowledge of God, so too does form criticism offer Christians an effective way of clearly seeing the God’s purpose through the bible.  Christians can better discern the path to salvation by eliminating the superfluous details and focusing on the meaning at hand.

Miller and Grenz begin Chapter One of their book, Fortress Introduction to Contemporary Theologies, describing a young theologian by the name of Karl Barth.  Barth was an accomplished theologian and an avid writer who penned a great deal of literature.  Barth had a great deal of interest in the existentialist philosopher Soren Kierkegaard.  Kierkegaard’s musings on existentialism go beyond simply being constrained by “theism” or “atheism”.  I found it interesting how Kierkegaard warned against confusing intellectual thought with passion based in theology.  I like how this relates to other notions by Kierkegaard.  There is an inherit difference in the realms of our faith and our earthly understanding; God is in heaven, but we are wholly separated from His sphere by being on earth. 

Barth furthered this idea with his quote, that “we must hold the Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other”.  It is important to recognize the differences in our perception of the world and our understanding of theology.  If we let these two spheres collide, there can be horrible outcomes.  An example of this is the “German Christians” of Nazi Germany; Christians who let the secular institution of Hitler’s propaganda machine merge with their faith, which had terrible consequences in the form of so-called Christianity endorsing persecution of the Jews.  While many Christians did not conform to this thought-process, the matter is that such a situation should never have existed in the first place. 

Barth was an influential and important theologian.  I found his actions during Hitler’s era in Germany to be profoundly encouraging.  He let his firm rooted faith guide his path, thus becoming a strong example of a Godly man in a time where God seemed distant.  Barth’s understanding of Kierkegaard’s theology and his application of said theology to the modern day is a great example of Christian thought.

In Rule for Life, the author talks about the pervasive rules that we create in order to have a set of guidelines with which we can measure our success and efforts.  He notes an example in the bible where followers of Christ devoted themselves to teaching the gospel and practicing communion.  Rules are always present in human interaction, though they can be changed according to experiences and future goals.  The author lists a few pretenses on which rules can be created.  I live by a few of these rules myself without even realizing it, such as setting time aside to pray.  It is indeed an unwritten rule that governs over my life and the lives of many other Christians.  When I forget to pray or do not have time, I feel guilty and lazy. 

The author goes on to talk about how he views our spiritual journey as a progression of seasons.  Indeed, the nature of our daily hassles often changes throughout our lives, but troubles are often only temporary until a new season dawns and envelops our lives.  If our lives change, but our spiritual practices do not, we can find ourselves in uncomfortable positions, woefully unprepared for trouble.  This is often an opportunity for growth, however.  God hopes to use our struggles as learning opportunities, placing us in situations that develop our faith and bring us closer to Him.  Like a personal couch, the Holy Spirit which inhabits the hearts of believers helps to tailor our spiritual practices into ways that help us to overcome adversity and bring glory to God. 

Without a doubt, Christians should seek to develop their ability to use daily situations and struggles as a tool to honor God by persevering through hard times and growing spiritually through adhering to our own personal spiritual laws.