Traditional theology took place in cultural contexts that reinforced the assumed truth of the basic religious dogmas which served as the theologian’s subjects of study. The modern world of increased religious pluralism and interfaith dialogue, however, has generally eliminated such assumptions and also undermined the effectiveness of traditional apologetics. Because the world has moved on, theology has had to evolve in order to cope.
This is sometimes referred to as a “crisis of theology” because theologians are forced to come up with new ways to legitimize the entire religious program from the ground up. Developments within religion (pluralism) and in the surrounding society (secularization) have challenged earlier foundations to the point where they no longer serve to support religious beliefs.
One tactic adopted by modern theologians is to develop critical justifications of dogmas usually taken on faith. Although theologians continue to assume their truth, a renewed effort is made to offer rational grounds for believing them. This differs from traditional apologetics because, rather than trying to construct rational proofs for the truth of dogmas, theology now attempts to explain how these dogmas might still have meaning for people even if they have reasons to doubt their truth.
This is not to say that traditional apologetics have been eliminated; far from it, in fact, especially in conservative, evangelical Christian churches. It does mean, however, that even when traditional apologetics is attempted it is no longer possible to proceed without a bit more critical reflection on one’s own dogmas and premises.
Another tactic is to more deeply insert theology into practical work being done today: politics, sociology, and psychology for example. A “political theology,” for example, would take some of the basic dogmas of religion and formulate them in a manner that is critical of society, seeking practical political solutions via the insights afforded by religious tradition. A good example of this would liberation theology, a combination of traditional Catholic doctrine and Marxist political philosophy that has been popular throughout Latin America for many years.
Thus, theological ideas develop in a matrix of political or social struggle rather than the white towers of academia or the cloistered halls of churches. In this manner theologians hope to make theology more relevant to modern, secularized cultures that have lost their traditional respect for the authority of priests, theologians, and church fathers. Other examples of politicized theologies include African theology, feminist theology, and black theology.
A third tactic that has become common among theologians is to push for greater ecumenism among various religious traditions. It’s to be expected that modern theology can’t proceed very far without taking at least some ecumenical considerations into account — the progress of religious pluralism has gone too far.
So-called “ecumenical theology,“ though, does more than simply acknowledge the existence of other theological systems: it also takes the contributions of those theologies into account, incorporating them into one’s own theological system. This tactic has achieved some measure of success within Christianity, though it still has a ways to go between religious traditions. Its purpose and methods are supposed to bring about greater unity among churches and, hopefully, religions.
One of the results of this is that the theologies of individual Christian traditions have lost much of their distinctiveness. They become “meta-confessional,” representing a consensus of theologians from many different and, traditionally, hostile churches. Ecumenical theologians proclaim their rejection of dogmatism and their reliance on tolerance. This sort of theology is likely one of the causes of the decreasing differences between the mainline Protestant churches in America. Ecumenical theology is generally rejected by most fundamentalist and conservative evangelical churches and denominations.
A final tactic, most often found in those traditions labeled “fundamentalist,” is to refuse any sort of accommodation at all and reinforce whatever social and religious institutions they have which they think will help maintain their traditions. Sometimes they will act as though nothing much has changed at all, and other times they will acknowledge the wider social changes by lashing out, or by trying to encourage the rest of society to regress to an earlier time when religious pluralism didn’t exist.
