No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Three Ways of Engaging Theologically with Modernity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2024
Abstract
The paper discusses three theological ways of responding to modernity, all of which rely in some way upon the analogy of the church as a culture. First, Friedrich Schleiermacher represents the turn to the subject and the turn to the church. Second, Stanley Hauerwas's rejection of the turn to the subject is shown to require a sharper turn to the church. Third, David Kelsey's recent work is used to present a modification of that turn substantial enough to constitute a third way. Kelsey's analysis of various theological logics and how they are often conflated in modern theology, together with his account of church practices, is used to integrate a more traditional theocentric theological approach with a more contemporary focus on the church's practices. Some conclusions are then drawn for critical congregational study of enactments of church practices.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2013 The Author. New Blackfriars © 2013 The Dominican Council.
References
1 Schleiermacher, Friedrich, The Christian Faith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1928)Google Scholar.
2 I discuss Hauerwas, including his relation to Schleiermacher, at length in my forthcoming book, Stanley Hauerwas: A (Very) Critical Introduction (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans), 2013Google Scholar.
3 For a brief summary, see Hauerwas, Stanley, A Community of Character (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1981, pp. 4, 9–12Google Scholar; and for more extensive treatment, the same book and also his Peaceable Kingdom (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1983Google Scholar.
4 See the first four chapters, written jointly by the editors, of The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics, edited by Hauerwas, Stanley and Wells, Samuel (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004)Google Scholar.
5 Hauerwas rarely mentions the Holy Spirit outside his sermons, nor does the action of the Holy Spirit make any material difference to his account of the church.
6 Among a range of sources for this conclusion is his Unleashing the Scripture: Freeing the Bible from Captivity to America (Nashville TN: Abingdon, 1993)Google Scholar.
7 David H; Kelsey, , Eccentric Existence: A Theological Anthropology (Westminster John Knox, 2009)Google Scholar. Hereafter cited as EE. The work of Hans W. Frei to which Kelsey refers is The Identity of Jesus Christ (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), pp. xi-xiiGoogle Scholar.
8 I here combine the conclusions of two of Kelsey's analyses in EE: chapter 2B, pp. 80–119, and chapter 19B, pp. 649–93.
9 See, for example, the sermon in his essay, “The Church as God's New Language”, which can be found in The Hauerwas Reader, edited by Berkman, John and Cartwright, Michael (Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2001), pp. 142–161Google Scholar; the cited phrase is from p. 143.
10 Hauerwas, Stanley, Working With Words: On Learning to Speak Christian (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2011), p. 166Google Scholar.
11 This is, of course, little more than a bare assertion, which would take considerable analysis to justify. I make the case for this criticism in the book referred to in note 2 above.
12 MacIntyre, Alasdair, After Virtue, second edition (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984), p. 187Google Scholar.
13 See the discussion of rival traditions in Alasdair MacIntyre, especially chapters 18 and 20 (pp. 349–369 and 389–403).
14 Hauerwas often exhorts us to be wary of this danger, particularly in his Sanctify Them in the Truth (Nashville TN: Abingdon/T&T Clark, 1998)Google Scholar.
15 The idea is not at all to inquire into particular individuals’ enactments, as in some kind of inquisition, but rather to gain a sense of general trends so as to seek ways to respond accordingly, through preaching, new or revised practices, and the like.
16 See Paul D. Murray, “Discerning the Dynamics of Doctrinal Development: A Postfoundationalist Perspective” in Oliver, Simon, Kilby, Karen, O'Loughlin, Thomas (eds), Faithful Reading: New Essays in Theology in Honour of Fergus Kerr OP, (London & New York, T & T Clark, 2012) p. 215Google Scholar.
17 The use of “theoretical” here is metaphorical, referring to the careful analysis of the practice's conceptuality in relation to broader theological knowledge. I do not mean to suggest there are two “moments”, a theoretical moment and its application in practice. The better word is probably “contemplative”.
18 I am assuming, for the sake of the example and without argument, that liberation theology began as a reflection upon church practices conceptually informed by an understanding of God as especially concerned with the poor, and not that such practices are merely the application of a new theoretical position.