Theological Anthropology of Critical Religious Pedagogy

Theological Anthropology of Critical Religious Pedagogy

It is important to critically analyse how we conceive of those we teach and beyond that, how we conceive of the human condition.  As a “heretical” Christian, I find little in “traditional” anthropologies that I can identify with or that I feel offers a life-giving understanding, although Rosemary Radford-Reuther’s calls toward a feminist anthropology hit home.  I like to think of people as co-partners in creating Kingdom.  

As a future minister, my task is to take all of the theoretical ways that I interpret scripture and the world and embody them with intentionality.  It is one thing to talk about equality and another to live it.  Groome’s suggestion that “we are now Christ’s representatives to each other” he turns in on itself– this means that I need to consciously think about how I represent Christ, but furthermore, how my parishioners will (Groome, 268).  It can be easy to step into hierarchical roles that lead us to abandon our “surface” theologies when we step into ministerial or teaching roles.  The ways that I manifest Christ’s presence in my life will be critically important, but I must be continuously conscious of the reality that while I must live my anthropology, I must also make sure that I do not grasp it so tightly that I articulate my worldviews in ways that become empire-building over kingdom-building.  Christ will work differently in different people’s lives and I must honor the ways that other people represent him (Groome, 268).  

Groome, Thomas H. Christian Religious Education: Sharing Our Story and Vision. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.