IN CONSIDERATION OF THE THEOPOETIC

by Jason Derr

originally published on Helium.com

WHY A THEOPOETIC?

When Plato thinks of theologians he thinks of poets engaged in God-Speak. These poets, though, are radicals deserving of expulsion from his perfect Republic. We should not be surprised by this; didn't
George Bush cancel a poetry night after 9/11? Have not the worst of
tyrants always sought to control speech and expression?
The truth is that our poetry and art, our Theopoetics, always cut to the heart of
our humanity. Theopoets know that to speak of divinity is to speak of
the human condition and to speak of the human condition is to speak of
divinity. Our god-speak is always incarnate, always tied up into the
dirt and sweat of human life. God speak, like the Eucharist or lords
supper, is always the ordinary made extraordinary. Ordinary words or
images made extraordinary because they open up that space of divine
longing within us. A longing for love, passion, sex, justice, mercy,
divinity and incarnation.
Systematic Theologies are always interested in creating a "scientific"
theological system. Its work is built on the premise of creating an
air-tight logic that includes every consideration divinity, humanity,
free will/predestination, Christology. The criticism is that some parts
of the system will be thin and incomplete in order to make other
arguments work. Constructive theology responds to this by seeking to
create a context specific theology. For example they may envision a
Christology with a feminist or womanist perspective, or a queer or
ecological outlook.
The theopoetic understands that the limits of a system or a
constructive theology is that the assumption that their will be no new
system to respond to and that what we construct for a feminist or
womanist view will not be challenged by new perspectives in these
fields. The theopoetic seeks to engage an image in its multiplicity of
meanings. It understands that an image takes on new meanings in a new
context, finds a new life every time it is encountered. A poem, for
example, has a new lesson, insight or implication every time we read it.
The theopoetic can be said to be a post-academic theology. We must say
this very carefully. We do not mean by this an abandonment of the
academic and its insights. Any one working with the spiritual hungers
in hh (her or/and his) era would be wise to listen closely to the
critiques coming form the academic world. By post-academic theology we
mean to borrow a phrase from Ken Wilber, the great voice of Integral
Philosophy, that the theopoetic should 'include and transcend' the
academic.

THEOLOGY IN COMMUNITY
If we are to walk into any given congregation we would find that the great conversations of theology, for the most part, do not reach the pews. Many pastors are unable to
pass theological commentary down to the pews for fear of backlash or
accusations of heresy. When we insist on a purely academic theology we
are then insisting on an theology divorced from the hungers of the
community.
The tragedy of this is that theologies, our God-Speak, is always
constructed for communities. Theologies are made to be lived, preached,
prayed and implemented in our lives. Theology, by its nature, is bound
to the life of a community. By divorcing the construction of theology
from the consumption of theology we have reduced the academic sphere to
another level of consumerism. We are able to, as individuals, produce,
consume and discard theologies.
In response to this the Theopoetic, I feel, could work very nicely
with-in Marianne Sawickis concept of the 3-Tables of theology as she
mentions in her work Seeing The Lord'. She suggests that theology
should always take place as a conversation between 3 tables of
theological reflection. Table One is the table of the academic and is
important for the reasons we have mentioned before. Table Two is the
needs and realities of the worshipping community and table Three is the
hungers and desires of the poor and marginalized. We should add to this
a Fourth table as well, the impulses and realities of the poet and
artist. We can imagine it as a theological action group.
The theologian-as-community does not insist on an agreement between all
three tables. Instead it insists on theology as a process of dialogue,
calling each table to the reasonable and responsible consideration of
critiques outside of itself. We can imagine it as a contemporary
midrash.
Amos Niven Wilder, theologian and brother of Our Town' author Thorton Wilder, names the Theopoetic in this manner:
"We should recognize that human nature and human societies are more
deeply motivated by images and fabulations than by ideas. That is where
power lies and the future is shaped." (Theopoetic: Theology and the Religious
Imagination)
Our hungers for the Spirit (Holy or Human or both) is best understood
and represented in our earthly desires and expressions. It is the
symbols, images and metaphors that we surround ourselves with, that
best convey how we know ourselves and the divine. The theopoet, as a
member of the tabled community, of the theological action group, as a
member of multiple communities, puts into expression that deep passion
for life.
What we must insist on in this post-academic theology is a flourishing
of theologies and theologians. We must insists on communities taking up
a voice across disciplines, in our images and poems, and speaking in
the world. We must insist on resistant communities, communities on the
edge taking up their voice as not only political rhetoric but as
poetry, film and art.

A THEOPOETIC FUTURE
The Theopoetic as practice places a conversation before the world. The 4 tables come together and proclaim human dignity and then, as a communal event, as a collaboration between
all 4 tables, we beg the world to recognize that dignity. We place it
in our poems and our films and we shock, seduce, awe and tempt the
world.
If the systematic and the constructive theologian publishes volumes of
thought then I dream of a time when the Theopoet publishes volumes of
poetry, zines, chapbooks, novels, philosophy and traditional theology,
films, posters, public and private art.
The theopoet is not about the task of doctrinal policing. We do not do
tours around the accepted margins of the church. We open up the hungers
and longings of our age. We enter into a conversation with the deepest
places of our selves and our audience. To engage in the theopoetic is
to tempt the radical nature of ourselves, it is to follow in the
footsteps of the God-Speakers that could upset the republic, could
speak from the margins of our hungers and unspeakable truths.
I imagine a future where theopoets will publish poetry and essay
collections, spiritual wonderings and commentaries about a specific
topic in need of reflection. Imagine a future where theological action
groups publish the results of a meeting of the four tables. I imagine a
future where theology and philosophy students are encouraged to pursue
poets, filmmakers and advertisers as thoroughly as they do an academic
tome. And I imagine a future where theology is welcomed to the pew as a
participant in our coversations.