THE GUTENBURG PARENTHESIS and the ELCA

 

Introduction to Concept

 

The pattern of human language development and diversity through the last 35,000 – 50,000 years, especially the development of human language as conveyed within its written forms, has up until the advent of the Internet historically followed a process from orality to literacy. What has been a progression of pictographic thought, moving to a combination sound/picture language (such as found in Egyptian Hieroglyphs) to identifiable cuneiform clay forms to script letters has been foundational for the transmission of human consciousness and experience. As each shift in writing occurred, the ability of humanity to transmit knowledge improved and impacted the society and culture.

 

The Western World was transformed as the movable type printing press of Johannes Gutenberg appeared in 1440. Certainly in the East the "Diamond Sutra", printed in China in 868 CE predates Gutenberg, but without the significant results in transforming culture as evidenced in Europe.  By 1500 the mass production of books, fostered a rapid transference of information through the transmission of texts in religion, science and the arts. The world of scribal transmission and oral performance transitioned to the literary world of books, reference materials, and extensive library collections.

 

The effect of Gutenberg created a “before and after” paradigmatic shift which prompted Europe to move beyond the Renaissance to its period of reason known as the “Enlightenment.” The advent of digital information, first sensed in computer transmission, then moving to Internet communication—which has substantially evolved in the last twenty years—has caused another “before and after” effect. The use of pictorial “icons” rather than the logic trees of computer scientists were a beginning to this process. Post print media—television, movies, webcasts, twitter, etcetera—has created another visual universe to transmit information, with the effect of language and communication becoming more oral than written, and more of a mix and match set up of human interaction.[1] Just as the Gutenberg movable type printing press caused a seismic shift in the culture, the recent period of Internet communications—already heralded by discussion within many technological and communication disciplines as the present “Web2.0” period—has impacted culture and society on an even greater, global scale.[2]

The concept of a "Gutenberg Parenthesis" was originally formulated by Prof. L. O. Sauerberg at the University of Southern Denmark. It offers a means of identifying and understanding the period, varying between societies and subcultures, during which the mediation of texts through time and across space was dominated by powerful permutations of letters, print, pages and books. Created in the midst of the discipline of literary criticism (specifically as it pertained to the study of Shakespeare) this concept has much farther reaching effects and interpretations to consider.[3] 

 

I will present the concept utilizing a table for comparison, and then discuss the effects and impact of the Gutenberg Parenthesis as it might apply and illustrate societal and cultural changes within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America—an institution that can easily be seen as a “child” of the intellectual stimuli and activity directly following Gutenberg from the period of the Reformation in the 1500’s CE to the present day.

 

A Discussion of the Gutenberg Parenthesis and its Effects

 

Here is a basic table of the “Gutenberg Parenthesis” below:

 

PRE-PARENTHETICAL      GUTENBERG PARENTHESIS    POST-PARENTHETICAL

re-creative                                                  original                                               sampling

collective                                                  individual                                             remixing

con-textual                                              autonomous                                         borrowing

unstable                                                       stable                                                reshaping

traditional                                                  canonical                                      appropriating

PERFORMANCE                             COMPOSITION                        recontextualizing

 

Of course, the thesis of this parenthesis is based on the evolutionary nature of human language development, as well as the inherent changeability of language as more people interact with each other.

 

Now, perhaps since you are reading this note on a website dedicated to Theology of the Cross, and discussions of the Christian theology of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, you may ask, so what?  Why am I writing about the Gutenberg Parenthesis?

 

I suggest that the table above, and the intellectual perceptions portrayed within the table, shows a change in thought patterns that are in place and interacting within the Evangelical Lutheran Church.  I assert that the upswing of Conservative, Fundamentalist Christian fervor in the North American context (which has become more extreme and polarized within the last three decades, beginning in 1975) is based on a theology and ecclesiology that is stuck in the center column of the Gutenberg Parenthesis. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, moving within the concepts and patterns of the greater culture and society as articulated in the Post-Parenthetical column, is either intentionally or inherently acting in a pattern that is transforming the focus of the ELCA, whereas the base of the ELCA is still living (or wanting/wishing to live) within the center, Gutenberg Parenthesis column.

 

Let me attempt an explanation.  The powerful process of exalting the “written word” of God, championed by Erasmus (although this was not his original intention), Martin Luther and Calvin created a new conversation, one that its roots in the reading of texts, but exponentially expanded to supersede previous theological arguments and formulas.  The Cannon or ruler of scripture went beyond the idea of a measuring stick to a scientific instrument capable of precision and perceived objectivity. The center section of the Gutenberg Parenthesis above allowed for a stable, autonomous, original and individual interpretation of Scripture within the European Mainland Reformation churches. If I might assert another perception, the churches of the Roman Catholic communion were still within the Pre-parenthetical column, regardless of the effects of the Renaissance. The resultant conflict was certainly one of the perception of faith, but also the perception of human society and development. Reformation theologians and churches intended to be a remembrance of the “apostolic” past, but was based on the Reformation understanding of “Apostolicity” that was grounded in the “teaching of the apostles,” not the traditions of the apostles being transferred due to the succession of the bishops laying on of hands. The Church of England in its English Reformation retained both an apostolic succession and a concept of apostolicity in teaching and tradition, in many ways standing as a hybrid of both the Roman Catholic and European Reformation Tradition. This certainly allowed for the rationalist movement which is categorized as the period of Enlightenment within Europe and North America.

 

The Gutenberg Parenthesis and its Post-Parenthetical implications

 

As the shift from the past control of the church, with society beginning to create and institute different codes of morality, ethics and law that would supersede previous accepted “Christian” attitudes took root, there was an expansion of intellectual discussion and conversation.  “Freedom of speech and the Press” became institutionalized within the societies of Europe and North America due to the consideration that the public good was more important than censorship. The profligation of newspapers, constitutional safeguards for free speech and the development of society as a place which embraced the freedom of information was a vanguard to the development of public libraries.  This then also became a foundation for the arrival of the freedom of information that is transmitted within computers via the Internet. Control of ideas, or a canonized container of ideas, naturally becomes assaulted within such an environment of freedom. This then creates a heightened awareness of individual thought, as well as a revision of community thought as it is remixed, re-appropriated and re-contextualized. Basic concepts can be allowed within a larger scale conversation—but even these concepts are subject to a sampling and borrowing process that includes experience, science, and societal perception to be a part of the conversation. The redefinition of community—or perhaps, a re-interpretation of how community works within an age of individualism—causes all concepts to be brought to a place of re-evaluation and re-articulation. The result is seismic in proportion, especially within the tradition and imbedded attitudes of churches, which are still living in a different world—the world of the central column above.

 

If the simple conversations above are allowed as a basis for consideration and discussion, is it not easily observed that the present day transformation of information will also change the church? Is it also possible to consider that paradigm paralysis is apparent for those who are still within the middle column of the Gutenberg Parenthesis; therefore there is limited possibility for flexibility within the discussions held between this group and those who stand within the far right column?

 

A Change in Paradigms

 

As researchers look at New Age Theology, Catholicism, Orthodox traditions, Mainline Denominations, Interdenominational Churches or Conservative Fundamentalist Churches the effects of both the strain and opportunity expressed by the Post-parenthetical column are present. Without intentional work at affirming and expressing ability for paradigm flexibility and interactivity between the developing poles of opinion there will be continued fracture and fragmentation within the greater Christian family.

 

Without any desire to either “Condemn or Defend,” the ELCA in its twenty two year history has been busy with each of the stated characteristics in the far right hand column.  Whether it is ecumenism, theology, polity changes, sociological transformation of the standards of the clergy, liturgy, scriptural authority or congregationalism the Post-parenthetical column is present.

 

As a supporter of the ELCA, and a rostered pastor, I certainly comprehend the actions of the church as it moves forward in ministry, mission and service.  I sense, however, what we are facing as the church is a transition of paradigms, borne from surrounding societal change and an awareness of the faith as it interacts with the world—something appropriate for Lutherans, as well as the church catholic.  The church catholic has been doing this for centuries. Yet, even in the process of incorporating contextuality and relevance of culture (Gregory the Great did this extremely well) there is also a place for discussion and reflection on what is and is not suitable for the greater church and society. 

 

The conversation regarding Same Sex Oriented Pastors within monogamous, committed relationships being allowed to serve under call is clearly a part of our extended conversations as church within the ELCA, and the greater society. Science has come to give insight as to human development and orientation, and so the ELCA has moved beyond the traditional interpretation of scriptural admonition which opposed same sex relationships.  Those who stand in the middle column of the Gutenberg Parenthesis have no ability for positive discussion of this action. Those who recognize themselves as standing in the far right column have ability both for discussion and change.  People who exist within the societal expression of both columns come to the question on the basis of faith, of spiritual reflection, of the witness of Jesus and understanding of the greater church. One group, desperately seeking stability of the past status quo seeks to affirm the canonization of the scripture as the authority which may not be changed (middle column). Others who are allowing the recontextualizing of this circumstance, appropriating scientific argument as a part of the conversation, along with an ethic of compassion based on love for the neighbor, allow for the change in the policies (far right column).

 

Where Might We Go From Here

 

As I consider the power of language transmittal and its transformational nature for culture and society, I find it impossible to consider the ELCA, or the greater church, as being immune to the effect of the Gutenberg Parentheses.

 

In some ways the underlying features of sampling, remixing, borrowing, reshaping, appropriating and recontextualizing may seem terrifying to some, especially if there is no ability to interact within two columns simultaneously. This is primarily because there is a lack of being able to fall back on arguments with “absolutism,” a tactic that ends all conversations. Some might well cry out, “Where is the authority for us to determine this or that question?” The answer I would give might seem obvious—rather than depending on the written word to give us a recipe for everything, we are forced back into a conversation with the community of the faithful centered around the incarnate Word of God—Christ Jesus—seen in bread and wine, and in the life of the body of believers. Rather than demanding conformity that is subjective to a specific, Gutenberg interpretation of the scriptures, the incarnation of Christ—who in his body, the church, brings together the diversity of the world through baptism—points to a different type of unity. Our unity comes from the incarnate Word among us, not an in-liberate word that we are unable to come to agreement about due to varying perspectives.

 

I sense that incorporating a Theology of the Cross—not simply considering the cross as the means by which we are saved through Christ—where God is seen and known in the daily living of life, including where there is suffering and an intentional love of the neighbor which goes misunderstood by many is a part of the Post-parentheses column. Rather than simply advocating an intellectual reality of “accepting” Jesus as Lord and Savior for “salvation” to occur within us, the church is called to embody the Lord and Savior by prayer, worship, loving neighbor, and acts of service and justice for the sake of the world God so loves. That would prompt an incarnation church, living an incarnational life, grounded in the incarnational God, known in Jesus Christ (John 1:14-18)

 

Such incarnational theology often has been sadly absent in the arguments we have waged within the past decades of the ELCA. Yet a re-contextualization of our theology of incarnation is the place where we can interact not only with each other, but with other communities of the human family who are also made in the image of God.

 

Questions or comments? Please send them to spiriteagle75@aol.com.