No doubt a minister has much to teach the people in the way of spirituality or and self-sacrifice and so forth. But? The minister himself might learn a little about physical existence, about the world that God made, from his parishioners, in turn.

Your post raises a scenario important for many doctors of theology: meeting a congregation, and then deciding to what degree to meet and follow, their culture and proto-theological expectations. Or say, guide those expectations and assumptions to a (perhaps) more informed and possibly more ascetic, less “world”ly theology.

Meeting the culture, confronts 1) the general, popular cultural expectations, of a secular/modern culture. And 2) specifically, their often politically-conditioned quasi theological beliefs (/”religion”?). In this situations though, is it simply a matter of becoming a Charles-Chaput-style culture warrior, and just rip out whatever cultural “stage” appears to be on the scene?

There is a tendency in the inner sanctum, to regard The Culture around us, as the enemy, the material “world.” And to simply seek to simply counter and oppose it, in church.

On the other hand though? My own experience, my own theology, suggests that the material life of the culture around us, has more validity and value than much of traditional, anti-worldly theology believes. If the Bible condemned “the world,” that would have likely been merely the “world” or “era” (Gk. “aeon”?) of Jesus’ time; not the entire physical world (as in some forms of dualism). Nor would it have been an attempt to condemn the life of those honest workers, working hard to keep the plumbing working; repairing the church roof and so forth. The “body of Christ” that is after all, partially physical.

Especially in fact? Far from seeing the educated preacher as a “Focus on the Family” type culture warrior, or ascetic/gnoistic world-rejecting monk, I firmly belive that the only viable theology in the end, is one that might to be sure note 1) sins and errors in everyday opinions, in excessive materialism and so forth. But that would 2) however also note – and even follow – much that is necessary and good, in physical life. Especially much that is good in say, “secular” “worldly” Science.

Much of contemporary Theology in fact, does not reject the ‘world” or the “flesh” as completely as monks once did. But attempts to reconcile itself to explicity, especially, “science.” Which in turn of course does not flee from or despise this physical existence. But begins to grapple with it fully, and sympathetically.

And even? Begins to learn from the world around us.

I dont’ know much about his work. But it may be that say, Kent’s exploration of Pannenberg’s notation of the value of the finer detail of our human “nature” too, would be useful here. In carrying even our “own personal Jesus,” and/or “personal” theologies, deeper. Carrying our sense of God into a deeper and fuller, more finely-grained embrace of specifically, the aspect of the “world” once known as human “nature.”

So that when a PhD in theology finds himself looking out at a congregation of mere physical human beings, and practical people? It would be in part with a sense that they need guidance into a refined spirituality. But also with a sense that our reverend doctor himself might learn something good, even something about God, from their allegedly “worldly” or physically-oriented existence.

Wow. While there is a part of me that admires his chutzpah, it is hard for me to admire his focus on church meetings as the means for demonstrating to outsiders what the church “truly is.”

To try to relate to God as a sort of abstract spiritual ideal, without seeing him as understanding or addressing the full complexity of our human nature, could rather make our relation to God slightly … airless. Or colorless.

It is generally thought that the advantage of having seen God appear in a human person – a physical person, Jesus – is in part God’s way of acknowledging the importance of our physical human selves, in part. And is though to be God’s way of giving us a human face, for God.