Using Grounded Theory In Practice

The question of the relevance of communicative theology in the world is a serious subject of discussion. When one speaks of communication today, the dominant idea is immediately the technological implication or understanding. There is also the growing tendency to seek to fulfil one’s destiny or aspirations in life and the subsequent disappointment that arises when these aspirations are not met. At the same time, the situation in the society is such that the world finds itself in a multi religious, multi-cultural and globally-connected environment.

There are so many disturbing realities in the world such as economic marginalisation of certain nations, deeper divide between the rich and the poor, ethnic conflicts and deadly wars in many countries and in recent times increasing terrorist activities. The world finds itself also in an ecology that is daily threatened by human activities as a result of greed. Infact, despite the fact of great technological advancements, the world has seen more cases of poverty and hunger. Indeed, the poor no longer feel the worth and dignity of human persons. The divisions in the world in all its different forms have still not been healed despite ground-breaking innovations in the science of communication.

Thus, as a result of the real situation of things in the world especially because there are so many poor people in the world, there is now the increasing necessity of a “solidarity of the abandoned” and “globalisation of solidarity”. These situations call then for a change of attitude in which justice and peace can be seen and promoted. The world has found itself in a situation of hopelessness from which it cannot save itself. Therefore, man finds himself stucked in this hopelessness. Although, the Church as a community of humans, also finds itself enmeshed and is affected by this hopelessness, the bigger dimension, however, is her response.

Norbert Mette, citing the Pastoral constitution of the church “Gaudium et Spes” opines that the communicative theology of the church as contained in the above document did not adequately address those provoking questions. He argues that the “Faith-Church-World”

thought pattern of the church is no more sufficient to address these worries. The church must

248 Hilberath Bernd, 2010, „Dialog-Communio-Kommunikation: Stationen meines theologischen Weges“, in:

Matthias Scharer/Hilberath Bernd, 2010, Kommunikative Theologie: Zugänge, Auseinandersetzungen, Ausdifferenzierungen, Wien, p.13.

105 not just remain in the traditional division of seeing things from the point of view of good and evil but that both the world and sinners must be redeemed. In the light of the Gospel, the church must understand the meaning of these happenings as “signs of the time” in other to make sure that the church occupies its rightful position in the world.

The church ought to cooperate then with other sciences to investigate the real causes of these negative tendencies and to access its implication for the society at large and the environment in which people live in order to be in a better position to know what the consequences are for our relationship with God. From this perspective, the church will be able to evaluate what theological and pastoral meanings these events have for the present time. An example of such evaluation is found in the introduction of Gaudium et Spes with the caption “The situation of man in the present world.”

In this particular document, the main content of communicative theology is formulated, thus;

“by virtue of her mission to shed on the whole world the radiance of the Gospel message, and to unify under one Spirit all men of whatever nation, race or culture, the Church stands forth as a sign of that brotherhood which allows honest dialogue and gives it vigour.”(GS.92).

This dialogue must begin in the church as the document further clarifies;

Such a mission requires in the first place that we foster within the Church herself mutual esteem, reverence and harmony, through the full recognition of lawful diversity. Thus all those who compose the one people of God, both pastors and the general faithful, can engage in dialogue with ever abounding fruitfulness. For the bonds which unite the faithful are mightier than anything dividing them. Hence, let there be unity in what is necessary; freedom in what is unsettled, and charity in any case (GS.92).

Since this mission involves all humanity, there is also the need to involve our separated brothers and sisters of other Christian denominations as well as those of other Religions who recognise the one God with beliefs that preserve religious and human values with the sole aim of achieving unity of all Christ’s faithful. Norbert Mette further argues that another important aspect in the formulation of the contents of communicative theology is so presented:

For our part, the desire for such dialogue, which can lead to truth through love alone, excludes no one, though an appropriate measure of prudence must undoubtedly be exercised. We include those who cultivate outstanding qualities of the human spirit, but do not yet acknowledge the Source of these qualities. We include those who oppress the Church and harass her in manifold ways. Since God the Father is the origin and purpose of all men, we are all called to be brothers. Therefore, if we have been summoned to the same destiny, human and divine, we can and we should work together without violence and deceit in order to build up the world in genuine peace (GS.92).

106 4.4.1 THE HUMAN PERSON AS COMMUNICATIVE

“One cannot not communicate” is a meta-communicative axiom formulated by Paul Watzlawick to drive home the sociological and socio-linguistic conviction that “human communication is a fundamental social ability to convey meaningful messages through the exchange of culturally significant symbols….(and that)every human being is, from the beginning on, an entity made for, and absolutely dependent on communication”²⁴⁹.

This assertion is equally true even for those who live in contemplative religious communities or Orders where verbal communication is kept at a minimum. This is a further proof that communication, especially at the non-verbal level, is not limited to humans alone but also applicable to God in the act of prayer. Some psychologists believe that communication is so essential that early linguistic disturbances in a person or lack of communication can lead to serious psychological or physical harm and in extreme cases, it can lead to death.²⁵⁰

Against the previously held view that at the pre-natal stages of life, the communication between infant and mother was one-sided, namely from the side of the mother and other care givers but recent studies have established that the communication is actually two-way, namely, both the mother and infant communicate with each other. And the environment is also influenced or affected by the kind of communication that takes places between the infant in the womb and the mother and care givers.

Paul Weiss further clarifies that man should not be understood as a being of relationship but that man’s existence itself is relational. Man’s nature of relationship is not to be seen as a way to a certain purpose of destination but his communicative nature is the purpose itself. So man’s communicative nature is derivable from the self-communicative nature of God who himself is the fullness of relationship. Thus, because man is created in God’s image in this sense, he is also relationship by his very nature.

Martin Buber, the Jewish philosopher, went further to describe the essential communication of humans as dialogical making a distinction between the “I-Thou” and I-It” encounters of humans. He writes:

Whoever says You does not have something for his object. For wherever there is something there is also another thing; every It borders on other Its; It is only being

249 Matthias Scharer/Bernd Hilberath, 2008, p.29.

250 One of such Psychologists who hold this view is Rene Spitz, 1965, The First Year of Life: A psychoanalytic study of Normal and Deviant Development of Object Relations, New York as quoted by Matthias Scharer/Bernd Hilberath, 2008, p.29.

107 bordered on/by others. But where You is said there is no something. You has no borders.

Whoever says You does not have something; he has nothing. But he stands in relation.²⁵¹ Buber explains that for interaction to succeed, no one can become an object or a ‘something’. The

“It” or subject matter described by Ruth Cohn in her Theme-Centred-Interaction (TCI) (which shall be discussed later) relates to the faith communication and to theology. Does this “It” refers to the “I-Thou” or to the “I-It” relationship were questions that are asked in relation to Buber’s postulations? Scharer and Hilberath believe that while the „I-It” refers to the contents of faith, that is theological contents, the „I-Thou “occurs when a human person stands before God’s infinite mystery and enters a prayerful or celebrative communication.

4.4.2 GOD AND MAN RELATIONSHIP IN COMMUNICATIVE THEOLOGY When one speaks of the relationship between God and Man, one immediately encounters the difficulty of first trying to explain the meaning of the transcendence of God. What implication does the transcendence of God have on the relationship between God and man? Since this concept is easily explained as the incomprehensibility of God, how does man access him? Does it mean that God must first be discovered before man can establish a relationship with him or that man should in his consciousness simply conceive God as accessible and understandable? This difficulty appears to come from man himself, according to Paul Weiss, in that man had not been able to fully comprehend the human nature itself and therefore can neither comprehend God nor grasp him. Does it mean because God dwells in an unapproachable light, he really cannot be known? God “who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honour and might forever. Amen.” (1Tim 6:16)

Many theological schools of thought believe that man cannot comprehend God but at the same time he is not inaccessible. The Faith is, thus, the meeting point (the “It” as shall be discussed later in the TCI model of communication) between God and man. Although, man is not God, man is made in his image and likeness. God’s power over man is further concretised in the words of Jesus “The Father is greater than I am” (Jn 14:28). How must man think of God? The author of the Acts of the Apostles acknowledges the power of God thus: “For in him we live and move and have our being.” (Acts 17:28) and St. Paul writes in the letter to the Ephesians: “one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” (Eph. 4:6).