Theological Fragments and an Elephant

Duncan B. Forrester, Emeritus Professor of Christian Ethics and Practical Theology in the University of Edinburgh, Scotland,  has written a fantastic approach to theology in his book, Theological Fragments: explorations in unsystematic theology.

The description reads, "Forrester here develops the notion, which is partly borrowed from Kierkegaard, at greater length, also responding to post-modernism and to the so-called end of ideology. This important collection provides a coherent and engaging exploration of a fragmented topic, and the essays contained within demonstrate how fragments of insight can be illuminating and effective guides."  

Drawing on the idea that no one perspective can explain what it is perceiving or what it has received comprehensively, Duncan tracks through different chapter titles like,


Theology in Fragments
The Mystery of the Human Person in Community
Good and Gay?
The Pastoral Significance of Mary: A Protestant Perspective
The End of Sacraments: Sacramental Action and Discipleship


While working through this text I was encourage and astounded by it's claim of no center but rather perspectives that should find confluence for greater clarity.  Kevin Vanhoozer borrows from this idea in his chapter in Globalizing Theology: Belief and Practice in an Era of World Christianity.  

Their basic premise can be summarized in the story of the blind men and the elephant,

It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
 
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

Many have critiqued this poem and held it up as an example of relativism.  The problem with that is that the premise of the poem is that all the men are blind and have never seen an elephant before.

In regards to theology, this explains the message of the book.  There can't be one way of describing God, especially from one's cultural-linguistical-geographical context.  We need the global community to do that and as such have a long way to go.

Truth is not relative - we are relative to the Truth!