It isn’t that no one wants to occupy the center; it is that you cannot occupy it. Choose, or it will be chosen for you.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://spectrummagazine.org/article/column/2010/08/20/disappearing-center
Is there a difference between being a centrist and being suspicious and weary of false dichotomies? I’m inclined to think that the disappearance of “center” demonstrates a disappearance of reason.
There are no happy mediums.
The definition of being a centrist is a function of its outliers. Because of this, its location should always be in a constant flux. Its dynamics prevents it from being static.
The Centre is always a difficult place to remain in Newtonian thinking. When the circle or sphere of ideas and influence is always moving, it matters more, which direction one chooses to move, and the fluidity with which one is prepared to adapt.
Being in the middle of the desert or ocean matters little if one is moving with certainty toward a safe place.
Those with mature faith are comfortable with their destiny and are drawn by certain values, rather than certainty in belief.
The church has misunderstood that its mission is to declare Christ and His saving grace. But there would have been little use for the hundreds of theologians had it remained as simple as that.
What is the ratio of SdA theologians to the Baptists, a much larger denomination? Do all churches spend so much time and money rewriting, defending and developing ever more hermeneutical explanations for what has been unchanging in the Bible for 1700 years? As the evidence shows, there are more conferences, more commissions established to study the true meaning of Scripture and devising new creedal statements. If this were spent in soul-winning would there be a difference? How many have been converted by new and different methods of exegesis and interpretation? Is it all simply an effort to have greater control of doctrines and members?