The Problem with Anti-Traditionalism and Anti-Intellectualism

*Disclaimer: I am and will remain a Charismatic. I believe in the ongoing involvment of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers and that he continues to empower and enable us today. There are, however, certain aspects of the charismatic movement with which I do not agree. I'm just addressing a couple of those.

The charismatic movement represents a strong reaction against a traditional way of doing church. We've all heard preachers speak out against "religion" or a "religious spirit." Charismatics tend to opt for an understanding of their faith which focuses more on relationship and less on tradition or ritual. This is understandable, of course, the charismatic revelation of the Holy Spirit's presence in our lives and in modern society has powerful implications which underscore the personal relationship aspect of our faith. Still, though, I've never seen the need for an anti-traditional faith. Although faith can become over-traditionalized, and ritual can and sometimes does replace a personal relationship with Christ, this does not necessarily call for a total rejection of tradition or ritual. Such and attitude serves only to cut us off from the past, and does not allow us to learn very much from the generations of Christians who came before. We must own our own faith, and have our own understanding and expression of what we believe, but our spiritual lives can benefit by a participation in the traditions and rituals through which previous generations have worshiped. Additionally, our relationship with God is not the same as our relationship with fellow human beings. His status as Creator and Lord demands that our relationship to him be not only intimate and personal, but also submissive and reverential. Charismatics are right in guarding against tradition replacing our personal relationship to Christ, but "religion" is and has always been relational in and of itself.

Charismatics (and others) also observe that faith can often be over-intellectualized, and frequently advocate a simple "child-like" trust in God. When I chose to pursue theological studies as my degree, I was warned more than once to be very careful not to lose my faith to intellectualism, and was advised by at least one person to go to ministry school instead. Most of us in the theology department have had to struggle with an attitude of anti-intellectualism at some point or another, and we spend a good deal of time talking about it in our lower-level classes. This anti-intellectual attitude is also understandable; the Church under modernism was frequently guilty of believing only that which they could understand (as opposed to the more healthy "faith seeking understanding" Anselm spoke of). But the response to the misplaced intellectualism of previous generations cannot be answered by the anti-intellectualism which is so prevalent today. It can only serve to create the opposite problem: a generation of Christians who can't articulate their faith because they have never bothered to understand it. Instead, a twisted intellectualism must be answered by a redeemed intellectualism. As a part of the Creation, human rational capacity has a divine purpose, a part of which is to reflect on our Creator and our relationship to him, doing our best to understand his nature and action in our lives. As finite and imperfect beings, we can never expect to fully grasp the wondrous mysteries of the infinite and perfect, and we must be careful not to adopt an outlook in which a thing must be proved before it can be believed, but we should test our beliefs (always in conjunction with the Holy Spirit) and use the God-given gift of reason to constantly refine them, in an attempt to bring them more perfectly in line with the Truth.