The Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test Jesus they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times… ” [Mt 16:1-3 NRSV][1]
The present reality of the church in the Age of Information (also deemed the Technological Age) is sufficient reason to believe the claim that the topic of technology stands as the most pressing theological question of the day. For Christians, who all practice theology to one degree or another, there arises a certain necessity to reflect on and respond to the existential questions of the present day. Pragmatically, contemporary Christians are called upon to answer the question, “What does it mean to live as Christians in the midst of a technological world?” However, it is a categorical mistake to assume that a value judgment concerning the convergence of technology with Christian spirituality is necessitated by such lines of questioning. In other words, as Christians, we must not feel pressured into classifying technology as right or wrong, in so far as it applies to Christian spirituality. To make such a judgment wrongly assumes a human understanding of finality, to which we claim only God is capable of possessing. This is not to say that technology may not be objectively right or wrong, but it is to say that our prerogative is to, first, theologically reflect on the convergence of technology with faith and, then, engage it in some way.
The Christian response to convergence technology is not to simply to reject it as worldly and live apart from it but, rather, to engage technology as part of the world in which we live as agents of God’s redeeming work. The author of the Epistle to Diognetus observes the church living in apparent paradox as people who dwell in the world but do not “belong to the world” (Jn 17:16):
“The Christians cannot be distinguished from other people by country, or language or the customs they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by singularity . . . They dwell in their own countries, but only as aliens. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as foreigners.”[2]
If these words, written to Diognetus, should speak a message to our present situation, it might be that the prima facie response of the church should not be to reject the constructs of society, in this case technology, but to live within and engage those constructs even as we remember that we live as aliens in this world. At the same time that we live within the constructs of a technological world, the Christian reaction must embody the understanding that to love the worldly for itself is dangerous and detrimental to spiritual formation. Augustine of Hippo voices the danger we face in becoming absorbed in technology when he confesses, “I longed to be satisfied with worldly things, and I dared to grow wild in a succession of various and shadowy loves.”[3] Indeed, just as the Christian response cannot simply be to turn and flee from the convergence of technology, a reaction which redirects devotion from God to the form which glorifies God is similarly destructive to spiritual formation. The tension between these two polar ends is reason enough to engage in grounded theological reflection in order to understand the proper Christian response to technological convergence.
The theological task of reflecting on the spiritual implications of convergent technology is one that our tradition (in particular the Church of Christ) is not necessarily fully-equipped to engage. This does not imply, however, that we are incapable of coming to grips with the spiritual and theological consequences of convergent technology. Rather, the unwritten Church of Christ doctrine that assumes the approach of sola scriptura (scripture only) as the source of theological understanding will not suffice as the means for answering the questions concerning technology. Although scripture is a legitimate theological source, perhaps even the primary source of divine revelation, the word of God as the basis for theology is not exhausted in scripture. The Wesleyan quadrilateral,[4] for instance, presents a four-fold paradigm for understanding the sources of theology which would broaden our heritage’s understanding of theological inception. Here, the starting points for theology consist of scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. Although the sources of the Wesleyan quadrilateral may not necessarily carry equal authoritative weight, understanding the different springs of theological insight are beneficial as we are encouraged to expand our vision, beyond scripture alone, in reflecting on the pressing faith questions of the day. The relevance of understanding the different sources of theology to the discussion regarding technology and spirituality is one primarily of historical-cultural contexts. It is important to realize that the narratives and teachings of scripture were lived and written within the context of an agrarian society; whereas, we find ourselves living within a society that is constructed around technology. Although scripture certainly speaks beyond its specific context and is enlightening to our conversation on technology, affirming and engaging other prospective norms of theological understanding will allow us to reflect more holistically on the interplay between technology and Christian spirituality.
Moving from the sources into theological reflection on the implications of technology for the Christian spiritual journey, it is necessary to establish some kind of criterion that embodies the purpose(s) of the spiritual life. In other words, in order to grasp the consequences of the integration of technology into the Christian spiritual journey, we must begin by establishing theological foundations for the directive of Christian spirituality. Very simply, I would offer that the spiritual journey is directed toward mystical union with God. Proceeding from the very essence of the triune God, which is relationality, we begin to understand our movement into communion with God. Therefore, the spiritual experience is none other than the process through which we are transformed into participants in God’s eschatological community. This process of spiritual transformation which we live into on earth, then, is marked by life-in-community. Therefore, the measure which might be used in our conversation concerning the convergence of technology and spirituality is one that is set toward the formation of life-in-community and, ultimately, union with God. While there are certainly other markers of the Christian spiritual experience, the movement of individuals into community with God and others stands at the center of the spiritual process, and it offers a standard by which convergence technology might be measured against.
By theologically grounding the Christian spiritual experience in a pursuit of life-in-community the conversation opens to invite the existential questions that are posed by the emergence of convergent technology. Given the brevity of this essay it would be incredulous to claim that all the nuances of convergent technology’s impact on spirituality could be addressed. Nonetheless, it is crucial to address some of the major points of emphasis which arise out of personal and communal experience. It might be argued that there are four fundamental spiritual disciplines that stand as cornerstones for the Christian spiritual journey that sharpen and transform degenerated beings into the likeness of Christ: the reading of scripture, prayer, silent meditation, and the practice of simplicity. Although convergence technology would certainly have implications in all four of these exercises, it seems that the emergence of convergent technology might pose serious threats to two of these spiritual disciplines in particular, the practices of meditation and intentional simplicity.
From my own experience I can attest to the effects of technology on the spiritual practice of meditation as I have rarely been encouraged to enter into meditation and I have only exercised the discipline on very few occasions. Such unfamiliarity with meditation and intentional silence, I would argue, is reality for the majority of the contemporary Christian body. While this lack of attention to meditation cannot be attributed fully to the dawning of the technological age, the place of convergent technology in our culture has been contributory to our inability to enter into silence. The noise of our daily lives has only been increased by the integration of convergence technology and there is a sense that we are at times almost in bondage to those devices which appear to bring us into greater connectivity with one another (via - i-phones, smart phones, internet, e-mail, blackberries, etc…). Yet, the terminology of connectivity should not be used synonymously with that of community. To do so is to perform one of the most destructive reductions in the church, for it has been acknowledged that the spiritual journey is directed toward life-in-community which necessarily must transcend mere connectivity.
Along the same vein, the impact of convergent technology on the practice of the spiritual discipline of intentional simplicity is astounding. Convergence of technology, by definition, is the attempt to do more and more with fewer devices. The tendency that the emergence of convergent technology creates is the inherent desire to do more, get more, and be identified by more. Such a tendency flies in the face of the spiritual discipline of intentional simplicity. Thus, the engagement of Christians with technology must be balanced by healthy practices which seek to bring us into practicing simplicity, even as it appears absurd to the technological world in which we live.
Jesus’ appeal to his listeners to be people who could “interpret the signs of the times” (Mt 16:3) should encourage the contemporary church to be attentive to the implications of the technology which exists as the framework of the society in which we live. The competing responses of rejection and unquestioned acceptance, both, reside outside of what might be considered the proper and responsible reaction by the Christian community in regards to the convergence of technology. Instead, the Christian response must embody theological reflection that is committed to engaging the constructs of the world in which we live as the community of God. Therefore, spiritual formation within the technological world of the twenty-first century is not going to take place as we try to separate spiritual disciplines from the forms of technology, but we must commit ourselves to creating spiritual disciplines which responsibly incorporate convergent technology.
Notes
[1] It should be noted that a portion of Jesus’ response, in 16:2-3, is plagued by textual uncertainty. However, whether original or secondary, the passage mirrors Mt 12:38-40 and sets the stage for Peter’s Messianic confession (16:16) toward which the Matthean author has been building toward since 4:17. For a good and concise interpretation of this passage see M. Eugene Boring, The Gospel of Matthew (vol. 8 of The New Interpreter’s Bible: ed. Leander E. Keck; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995), 340-41.
[2] “Epistle to Diognetus,” in Invitation to Christian Spirituality: An Ecumenical Anthology (ed. John R. Tyson; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 59.
[3] Augustine of Hippo, “The Sinful Heart” in Invitation to Christian Spirituality: An Ecumenical Anthology (ed. John R. Tyson; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 105.
[4] Stanley J. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 15-16. It is worth noting that Paul Tillich (Ibid.) offers a worthy critique of the claim that experience exists as a source of theology. Whether experience should be considered as a primary source of theology, or not, it cannot be dismissed because there is very little which we can conceive of reality that is not learned through experience. Experiential understanding in the realm of theological reflection is of particular importance for conversations such as the one we are currently engaged in concerning the interface between technology and Christian spirituality.
Lake Brownwood Climbing Guidebook
13 years ago