July 21, 2007

(8/21/12: Slight rewording with significant spelling corrections)

Framewords: Culturally Reactionary Epochs Explicated

The Following is a Response to “Whence Hermeneutic Authority” from http://www.emergentvillage.com/weblog/whence-hermeneutic-authority-download-and-dissect?commented=1c001198

Framewords: Cultural Reactionary Epochs Explicated, With Concluding emphasis on the necessity of Cultural/Epistemological Framework Transcendence, and an avoidance of the eventual- Nihilism

I have a working theory that both the modern and the so called postmodernist churches are looking at each other from the wrong perspective and the failure to relate with one another is more of an issue of segmented epistemological frameworks in terms of cultural history, rather then one being straightforwardedly wrong vs. the other. Allow me to explain: Postmodernity is in revolt against Modernity, whereas Modernity is itself once and still presently in revolt against Premodernism/Classicalist (or perhaps the Mythological) Each are merely Cultural Reactionary Epochs that are revolting against the prior cultural understandings of openly valid and accepted epistemological appropriations of ideology/truth/experience that coopt “Framewords” such as Modernism, Postmodernism to illustrate their respective “World Views” or ideological assumptions of how to approach not just cultural but the entirety of knowledge and experience. Each reject the concerns and interpretive methodologies of the prior Epistemological Frameworks of the prior cultural Epoch. Each age or epoch potentially entails valid teleological elaborations and spiritual/mortal/cultural extrapolations that are prone to rejection by the proceeding epoch that declares it’s precedent epoch’s understandings foundationally invalid. The subsequent alienation compounds past alienations; and a valid argument can be made that Postmodernity is not only alienated from Modernity but also Premodernity as well. The only valid and comprehensively applicable epistemological framework is one that is transcendent across all Reactionary Cultural Epochs, and – with the strongest possible affirmation attending – this is the ONLY truly adequate presentation that can be made of the church and the Scripture: that it must be here that it gets it’s identity and foundation – it can be understood partially, but not comprehensively, through which ever culturally presently-modern mindset or epochal epistemological framework is currently in Reaction/Rejection of the Priors (for now, Postmodernism). The term “World View” is a potentially vague term that is usually used to reference one’s own limited Epistemological Framework which is usually limited because of the constraint of it’s attendant Reactionary Cultural Epoch under which it is accepted by the individual in question: Modernists only understand Modernism, Postmodernists only understand Postmodernism, and Classicists/Mysticicists only understand the Classical or Mythological. To constrain the voice of the Church and Scripture through the Limitations of one’s one cultural/epistemological approximation’s rapes the Gospel and violates it. The Gospel and subsequently the Church must speak above and through, not just Postmodern Mindsets – but also Modern Mindsets, and Classical Mindsets as well.

An example of this reactionary/rejecting process is Modernism re-appropriations of Classiciscism’s understanding of the Scripture’s Authority and re-interpreting it as authority=inerrancy; whereas inerrancy is a scientific term and not a spiritual terms. The scientific inclination’s of Modernism’s mindset assumes that there is no Authority without quantifiable scientific Inerrancy; and therefore is forced to tip it’s hat towards disbelief, in an affront to the true nature of faith and a subsequent march towards Natural Theology which much of Present Evangelical Theology has a crack-like addiction to. Postmodernity likewise has a revolt against Scientific/Spiritual absolutes because of it’s alienation from Modernism’s epistemological framework that entails the understanding of truth and absolutes in a concretely appropriated abstraction.

The logical outworking of successive epistemological alienations progressively weaken each generation’s epistemological groundings and while they are trumpeted as being stronger they are in fact more frail the frailty that preceded them, and it is not enough for adherents of prior Reactionary Epoch to mindlessly criticism them – for they themselves suffer from the same ideological reactionary/rejecting blight and can only further themselves by embracing a mindset, which is likewise the cure for those that both preceded them and proceeded them in prior and following Culturally Reactionary Epochs, that of a MetaModern or transecentently minded ideological mindset.

The answer is not another existing Frameword such as Classicism nor is it a return to Modernity – and, no, it is not Postmodernity. The neologism needed- is not another new idea -rather it it a re-embracement of prior rejected appropriations. The only valid and whole epistemological framework is one of a transcendent or Metamodern ideological framework that lives and embraces the ideological understandings of both Classicism, Modernism, Postmodernism and whatever ism that evolve in terms of further subsequent cultural reactions. Failure to address continued epistemological rejections/alienations will result in a complete ontological breakdown and the end result will be nothing less then complete and rampant Nihilism because when the next generation begins to also reject Postmodernity – there will be nothing left to reject.

Respectfully Submitted,
matthew lipscomb