WHY CAN'T WE WRITE SOME MORE GOSPELS? asks John Mann. The idea behind narrative theology is that the basic unit of our experience, rather than being some metaphysical entity such as identity or presence or idea, is narrative. We can define "narrative" as an essential interconnection of story, plot, character and theme and hence that any attempt to separate one from the context of the others would necessarily alter it.
The appeal of narrative theology operates on at least two levels. Firstly, the trend in biblical studies at the moment is towards textual criticism, where the biblical text Is examined on its own terms within a structural unity rather than attempting to ground it in some speculative historical framework. Secondly, the philosophical trends of post-structuralism and deconstruction use the idea that "there is nothing outside the text" to interrogate various discourses (philosophical, political, ethical etc) and reveal their strategies for the production of truth : the situating strategies, the positioning strategies, the marginalising strategies etc.
This article looks at how these two disciplines work to sustain the velocity of narrative theology and at how this form of theology can be utilised in the production of a radical post-theological discourse.
Biblical criticism has defined itself in relation to the historical analysis of the Bible for most of its existence. It was seeking to answer such questions as "did this really happen?" and "what is the historical origin of this text?". Thus much of the Bible became fragmented into different sources, editors and traditions. This fragmentation was partially suspended by the introduction of redaction criticism around the 1950s which whilst continuing the fragmentation
process to some extent (by seeking to identify which sections were introduced by the redactor/editor) nevertheless saw the editor as seeking to create a unified whole, with the various materials included for some purpose.
Thus it became possible to seek the meaning of a book, for example the gospel of Mark, rather than simply to seek its origin, or which parts of it related to which sources and traditions. The next logical step along from this position is to ignore all "outside" details such as "did it really happen like this ?", "could this really happen ?" etc (i.e. superimposing some meta-level of reality beyond the one described in the text) and simply seek to understand the text in its own terms. Textual criticism thus treats a biblical text as any other text, asking how different characters and situations function within the narrative whole.
Textual criticism is perhaps simply an application of the philosophical strategy of deconstruction, which seeks to undermine the metaphysical foundations of western thought and language. Deconstruction is too complex a phenomenon to explain in any detail, but perhaps a flavour can be given of the type of questions it asks.
Suppose we are a teacher and we wish to explain something to our class. We cannot just somehow transfer the essence of the idea directly into their minds, we have to convey the meaning by utilising a strategy. We shall construct a context, create some central "characters", situate the different actors and ideas within this narrative and create margins and stopping points, beginnings and endings. For deconstructionists, truth isn't pulled out of a hat (made immediately present to itself) but has to be produced or situated.
Thus we can see that, while neither textual criticism nor deconstruction ever make the move of reducing the object in question to simply a literary text, they both nevertheless utilise the plurality of literary theory which sees texts as operating at many different levels.
Any more "scientific" method which tried to find a final truth or to pin down the essence of an object would find its treasure turn to dust (plurality, ambiguity, undecidability and multiplicity undermining the fixity of final truth).
Within our postmodern culture the language of ideas, of debate, logic and discussion has been replaced by a different medium : the image. Theologians have tried in vain to translate the Greek and Latin metaphysical expressions of Christianity into a meaningful modern idiom but Christianity has somehow survived in spite of this. Why ? The reason possibly lies in the modern conception of reality being of a highly narrative style. From TV, film, advertising and the media we receive much of our information through some form of narrative, where the question of "is it really true ?" only functions as one strand among many in the intertextuality (texts interconnected together, forming a weave of many strands) of information flow.
In the media it is not ultimately important whether something is true or not, we learn to go with the flow, accepting the image-story-text on its own terms. If the text announces that "the truth" is important to the story, the various narrative strategies of "determining the truth" (as detective, scientist, spy, through interrogation, investigation, seduction etc) are then utilised and the flow of images continues.
At present the Church functions on at least three different narrative levels and it is these which determine the meaning of "the Church" to millions of ordinary people. 1. The first level is the symbols, images and practices that make up contemporary Christianity, and has three sub-levels : public figures, common stereotypes and common practices. (a) Public figures such as the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Durham, Billy Graham, Cliff Richard, Mother Theresa, Lord Soper, Ian Paisley and Martin Luther King. (b) Stereotypes like the sitcom vicar, the monk, the nun, the black pentecostal, the Southern Baptist, the elderly Anglican lady, the fundamentalist, the Jehovah's Witness, the charismatics and Born Again Christians. (c) Common forms of Christian practice such as prayer, hymns, marriages, funerals, sermons, mass and eucharist, confession and baptism.
SUMMER 1990 PAGE 17 SEA OF FAITH MAGAZINE 2.The second level is the popular understanding of the Christian message : the Resurrection, the miracles, the Virgin Birth, Jesus' poverty, his parables and teaching on love, God in Heaven, Satan, Hell, Angels etc. 3.The third level is the popular understanding of how Christianity has been in the past: the Inquisition, the Crusades, Witch Trials, the martyrs, the Protestant-Catholic split, Victorian values etc.
In seeking to re-examine and re-explain Christianity, modem theologians have barely grappled with the issue of the meanings of Christianity, how they are determined and how they can be altered. Seen from this perspective, theology is a very blunt instrument only obliquely addressing the issues of representation, image and meaning. :: :•:•:•:•:: :•:•:•::::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:•:
The Church changes when symbols within this matrix of images change. When new "actors" or "characters" appear : the political pastor, the gay vicar, the atheist priest etc. This causes a certain change within the distribution of roles. When the stereotype is not just some faceless invention of the media but a real person, the person in that role can to some extent change the meaning of the symbol. When the media invents an "atheist priest" they create one meaning.
When the Bishop of Durham defends and explains himself on TV he generates a different meaning, superseding (or at least complicating) the previous one.
In investigating at the level of theology and theory, modernist theologians misunderstood the role of theology within a mass culture. Theology is not some pivotal point which, when moved, changes all other forms of Christianity. As we now know, theology and biblical criticism can change beyond recognition and have no effect whatsoever on the popular understanding of Christianity and the Church.
To meet the needs of postmodernist societies governed by image, actor and narrative, the Church has to find some way of working within these organs of symbolic production. Theology as traditionally understood cannot be expressed (as theology) in the pictorial, narrative language of postmodernism. What is required is a post-theological discourse, expressing new meanings and ideas directly via new narratives.
This has a precedent in the practice of the early Church, which we now know constructed stories concerning Christ and the disciples to meet directly issues and needs of the Church at that time. The fact that the Church played a creative role in writing the gospels is justification enough to return to the practices of the early Church (a cry often heard now anyway), and encourage new gospels, new stories of Christ, new miracles and sermons. If Jesus is still alive, it means he is still changing, still doing new things, still coming to people where they are and meeting their needs. The New Testament reveals the early Christians' rewriting sources, inventing, adapting, (in Paul's case radically re-creating) what Jesus did and who he was. The power of this creative narrative-theology can be seen in the Nag Hammadi writings, whose spirit was tragically stifled and killed by the orthodox Church.
Christ will only become meaningful to people today if artists, film-makers, writers and poets are free to interpret, reconstruct, re-write Christ in the twentieth century. Scorsese's film of Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation" should just be the beginning of artists asking difficult questions about Christ, to bring the multiplicity of Christianity into dialogue with the plurality and intertextuality of postmodernism. The Church can play a role in leading this renaissance by providing the theological justification (such activities were practised by the early Church), enthusiastic encouragement (i.e. not condemning such works but encouraging people to see/read them) and practical example (showing the public how creative the gospel writers were, encouraging them to read the Gospels of Thomas and Phillip, the Secret Books of James and John etc.).
We have seen how the church structure of disseminating truth, from the heights of theology down through the pulpit and out to the congregation has been ruptured with the establishment of the mass media. Meaning is no longer stable and reaffirming of tradition and order but is an effect used for whatever function the film-maker, news editor, advertiser or writer wishes. To function within postmodernism, one either joins in this whirling pool of image, symbol and meaning (often called "hyperreality") or becomes defined, positioned, limited and labelled by those who do.
The Church, in refusing to participate, has become labelled and stereotyped and so ceased to function on its own terms. It should break out of this grey inaction by utilising its own narrative resources and join the whirling acceleration of the hyperreality of postmodernism.
JOHN MANN lives in Suffolk and is an analyst programmer.