St Augustine is credited with having written, "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in everything, charity." For Augustine, then, there were really only two categories of doctrines: essentials and non-essentials. Quite frankly, the theological landscape of his time did not demand much more than that. Times change and not always for the better. More complex issues rise to the surface and get in the way of conversation.
Dr. Albert Mohler, in 2004, proposed a three-tier system to help deal with theological issues that were surfacing within Christianity and for which Augustine's two-tier system left lacking. For Dr. Mohler, there are three levels of theological urgency: first-order doctrines, second-order doctrines, and third-order issues.
Let's define these briefly but in relation to the thelemic community.
- First-order doctrines are those hierological issues that would include doctrines most central and essential to the Law of Thelema.
- Second-order doctrines are distinguished from the first-order set by the fact that Thelemites may disagree on the second-order issues, though this disagreement will create significant boundaries between adherents. When Thelemites organize themselves into organizations and denominational forms, these boundaries become evident.
- Third-order issues are those things over which Thelemites may disagree and remain in close fellowship, even within local groups and organizations.
When I look around at groups—both online and offline—and I watch conversations happening, what I see most is third-order issues dividing the conversation into sectors of opinion reframed as some kind of importance. I think the example Gerald uses all the time is a prime example of a third-order issue that used to be a big one in some areas: Polygamy versus Monogamy. Quite frankly, who cares! But there were some who would turn this into a first-order issue if only for their own sexual predatorial habits.
I find Dr. Mohler's closing comments to be as succinct as they are accurate and serve as a warning for us all:—
The mark of true liberalism is the refusal to admit that first-order theological issues even exist. Liberals treat first-order doctrines as if they were merely third-order in importance, and doctrinal ambiguity is the inevitable result.
Fundamentalism, on the other hand, tends toward the opposite error. The misjudgment of true fundamentalism is the belief that all disagreements concern first-order doctrines. Thus, third-order issues are raised to a first-order importance.
I suggest it's time to change the conversation. I think it's time to sit down and begin the discussion over what really constitutes first-order doctrines. When all is said and done, I truly believe there will be some who are shocked by the results. I think there will be those who abuse their assumptions because catchphrases and slogans are easier than doctrines and truth claims.
As a friend of my so succinctly put it today: New Game. I agree. It's definitely time for a new game. And I propose that we change the venue as well. It's time to take some clues from the emerging church movement.
