Theology in the Public Square E-Book

Gavin D'Costa

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Serie: Challenges in Contemporary Theology
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 582

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2013

Beschreibung

This imaginative study rethinks the nature of theology and its role in universities.

• The author sketches out a fascinating project using examples from US and UK institutions, whereby theology becomes a transformative force within universities.
• Imagines what a Christian university, in which all disciplines have been theologized, would look like.
• Feeds into discussions about the religious identity of denominationally-linked colleges and universities.
• Forms part of a wider attempt to imagine a vital public role for theology that enables it to serve both the Church and the wider community.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Challenges in Contemporary Theology

Title

Copyright

Dedication

Preface

Acknowledgments

Chapter One: Theology’s Babylonian Captivity in the Modern University

I Should “Theology” and “Religious Studies” Be Terminated?

II On (Not) Doing Theology in the Modern University

III On the Secular Respectability of Doing Religious Studies

IV MacIntyre and the Criticisms of Liberalism and Postmodernism

Chapter Two: Babylon in the Church: The United States and England

I A Brief Review of the United States: The Secularization of the Christian University

II A Brief Review of England and the Secularization of the Christian University

Chapter Three: Cyrus Returns: Rebuilding the Temple in Babylon

I Desirable Sectarianism

II Funding and Accountability: A Clash of Authority?

Chapter Four: Why Theologians Must Pray for Release from Exile

I A New Context for University Theology: Ecclesial Prayer

II Cohabiting with One’s Beloved

III The Nuptial Love Affair

Chapter Five: The Engagement of Virtue: A Theological Religious Studies

I An Example of Theological Religious Studies: A Methodological Note

II Roop Kanwar—A Hindu

Devi

?

III Edith Stein—A Catholic Saint

IV Virtuous Women as Emblems of Gratuitous Grace or Victims of Patriarchy?

Chapter Six: The Marriage of the Disciplines: Explorations on the Frontier

I Walking Down the Aisle?

II A Banquet in Sight: The Possibilities of a New Harmony

III Sharing the Feast? Theology, Physics, and Cosmology

Epilogue: Theology: The Church at the Heart of the Christian University Proclaiming the Word to the World

Bibliography

Index

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Begin Reading

Pages

cover

ii

iii

iv

v

vii

ix

x

xi

xii

xiii

xiv

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

Challenges in Contemporary Theology

Series Editors: Gareth Jones and Lewis Ayres

Canterbury Christ Church University College, UK and Emory University, US

Challenges in Contemporary Theology is a series aimed at producing clear orientations in, and research on, areas of ‘challenge’ in contemporary theology. These carefully coordinated books engage traditional theological concerns with mainstreams in modern thought and culture that challenge those concerns. The ‘challenges’ implied are to be understood in two senses: those presented by society to contemporary theology, and those posed by theology to society.

These Three are One: The Practice of Trinitarian Theology David S. Cunningham

After Writing: On the Liturgical Consummation of Philosophy Catherine Pickstock

Mystical Theology: The Integrity of Spirituality and Theology Mark A. McIntosh

Engaging Scripture: Theology, Politics, and the Body of Christ Stephen E. Fowl

Torture and Eucharist: A Model for Theological Interpretation William T. Cavanaugh

Sexuality and the Christian Body: Their Way into the Triune God Eugene F. Rogers, Jr

On Christian Theology Rowan Williams

The Promised End: Eschatology in Theology and Literature Paul S. Fiddes

Powers and Submissions: Spirituality, Philosophy, and Gender Sarah Coakley

A Theology of Engagement Ian S. Markham

Alien Sex: The Body and Desire in Cinema and Theology Gerard Loughlin

Scripture and Metaphysics: Aquinas and the Renewal of Trinitarian TheologyMatthew Levering

Faith and Freedom: An Interfaith Perspective David Burrell

Keeping God’s Silence Rachel Muers

Christ and Culture Graham Ward

Theology in the Public Square: Church, Academy, and Nation Gavin D’Costa

Rewritten Theology: Aquinas After His Readers Mark D. Jordan

THEOLOGY IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE

Church, Academy, and Nation

Gavin D’Costa

© 2005 by Gavin D’Costa

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK550 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia

The right of Gavin D’Costa to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

First published 2005 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd

1 2005

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

D’Costa, Gavin, 1958–Theology in the public square : church, academy, & nation / Gavin D’Costap. cm.—(Challenges in contemporary theology)Includes bibliographical references and indexISBN-13: 978-1-4051-3509-2 (hardcover: alk. paper)ISBN-10: 1-4051-3509-3 (hardcover: alk. paper)ISBN-13: 978-1-4051-3510-8 (pbk.: alk. paper)ISBN-10: 1–4051–3510–7 (pbk.: alk. paper)1. Universities and colleges—Religion. 2. Church and education.3. Religious pluralism.I. Title. II. SeriesBV1610.D36 2006230’.01—dc22

2005003250

A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library.

The publisher’s policy is to use permanent paper from mills that operate a sustainable forestry policy, and which has been manufactured from pulp processed using acid-free and elementary chlorine-free practices. Furthermore, the publisher ensures that the text paper and cover board used have met acceptable environmental accreditation standards.

For further information onBlackwell Publishing, visit our website:www.blackwellpublishing.com

For Sachin and Roshan

Preface

I have been teaching theology of religions for some 22 years and inevitably one reflects on the institutional context of one’s intellectual work, for me, the university. This book is the result of such reflection. I hope it will interest those concerned with the future of the university in Anglo-American culture and those who believe that the university might be other than the intellectual production line in the industrial halls of late postmodern capitalist society. This book is also addressed to those who teach and study the disciplines called “theology” or “religious studies” (or “comparative religion” or “history of religion”). To the former, it is yet another voice in a growing symphony that imagines a vital public role for theology so that it may serve both the Church and the wider secular and inter-religious culture in which we live. To the latter, it is a challenge to consider a theologizing of their discipline. In the final chapter of the book I indicate how this theologizing of all disciplines is what might characterize a theologized university—a Christian university. Thus, this book might also be of interest to Christian intellectuals who may sometimes wonder what their Christian identity has to do with their university work. Hence, I address a triangular and often overlapping audience: the Church, the university, and the “public square” made up, as it is, of the former two, but also other religions, secularism, and various ideologies.

In chapter one, “Theology’s Babylonian Captivity in the Modern University,” I reflect on the sense in which both theology and the major site of its production, the modern university, have been secularized. I speak of England and the United States in what follows. This has profound consequences, two of which I explore. The first, more related to my own intellectual interests, is the birth and development of religious studies. I argue that religious studies is locked into an Oedipal relation with theology, as it is in fact a child of secularized forms of theology, and its logic leads to the demise of theology. Concerned as I have been with theology of religions, I suggest that the reverse would be more productive. I argue for a theological religious studies, for the theologizing of a discipline (religious studies) that should properly serve theology. An example of this is found in chapter five. The second consequence of the secularization of the university and theology within it has been the fragmentation of the disciplines. The rationale for the modern university is increasingly consumerist, reflecting our Anglo-American context. And often it is the Arts subjects, including theology, that are seen as most difficult to justify in financial and educational terms: a theology degree does not obviously help one to become a good economist, nurse, or bus driver. On the contrary, I suggest that theology’s pivotal place in the origins of the university in Europe rightly implies that it, with philosophy, has the ability to unify the disciplines. I return to this unifying possibility in chapter six. The consequence of this analysis is my argument for a Christian university, rather than for internal plurality within the modern liberal university. I want to argue that theology can best serve secular society by being properly theological, capable of articulating a vision that both challenges and embraces the best of modernity. This is one virtue of theology.

I am Roman Catholic so I try to work this out in terms of a Catholic vision, drawing heavily on certain Catholic sources, even though many of the most inspiring theologians I have read have been non-Catholics. (I use “Catholic” to mean “Roman Catholic” for brevity’s sake, fully realizing that the word can be properly applied more widely.) I started this book envisaging arguments for a Christian university, but soon realized that too many denomination-specific issues had to be faced. Hence, my strategy has been to present arguments for a Catholic university, not in an unecumenical spirit, but rather the opposite. It is important first to envisage what a Catholic university might look like, and other denominations might do the same, before we Christians might work together toward a “Christian university.” Certainly, in England, this is more plausible than a denominational institution, even though historically all the major universities that were Christian were first Congregationalist, Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, or of other denominations, and then “Christian.” I very much hope that non-Catholic readers can enter into the project, realizing that glorifying Christ in the academy has to be worked from the bottom up, through our respective ecclesial communities.

In the second chapter, “Babylon in the Church: The United States and England,” I selectively test my comments about the state of the modern university in relation to the United States and England. Reading chapter one, a response might be: “what you say may be true of secular universities, but there are many church-based universities in the United States. Surely the plurality of education you seek can be found in such contexts?” In the United States I focus on Catholic institutions primarily. Although there are glimmers of hope and flashes of brightness, I chart a slow “dying of the light,” the growing secularization of the very institutions that might challenge modernity and postmodernity’s habits of thought and practice. In England there is a very different situation. There are no great Christian universities left, even in name, as in the United States. However, the history of English universities follows some similar patterns: from church-based institutions of higher learning to secularized universities. Chapter two serves to act as an empirical fleshing out and testing of the thesis of chapter one. It leaves me with a number of further questions regarding the plausibility of the type of Christian university I am proposing, in terms of its social divisiveness, its academic freedom and accountability, and funding.

These issues are the topic of chapter three: “Cyrus Returns: Rebuilding the Temple in Babylon.” I argue that liberal modernity is in fact committed to religious plurality and diversity in society and that these goals are best served, in some circumstances, by helping religious communities to learn and practice their traditions faithfully. In the intellectual realm, this means the funding of “sectarian” universities only in so far as they are committed to the “common good” and engagement with other traditions. These two requirements are actually generated from my own theological position, but overlap with elements of modernity. Hence, my metaphor of Cyrus, King of the Medes and Persians, who helped the Jews rebuild the temple, allowing a return to Jerusalem and suggesting that those who remained in Babylon help finance the project in Jerusalem (2 Chron. 36: 22). I inspect the arguments about sectarianism, in part, to explode some of the rhetorical stances taken by critics of the type of position I’m advancing, and in part to respond to some very genuine concerns. After trying to address such concerns, I examine the complex issues of the accountability, freedoms, and funding of a Catholic university in the United States. Can the university serve the Church and society at the same time? If it is Catholic, will it not skew things to the advantage of a minority interest group in our pluralist society? And should society pay for institutions that are accountable primarily to minority communities that can often launch truculent criticism of that wider society? Part of my answer is that the accountability of theologians and others in a Church university, while a complex matter, is no different, formally speaking, from accountability in all professions and all disciplines. And most importantly, there is no clear case that academic freedom is called into question. Rather, the opposite may occur: genuine creativity and interdisciplinary research may occur in universities accountable to a unified vision of life, grace, and love.

Having cleared the ground a little, and I realize that many objections still remain, I turn to a distinctive aspect of a Christian university in chapter four, “Why Theologians Must Pray for Release from Exile,” that of prayer. At this point I abandon the rational argumentative mode of the first three chapters and will proceed as if the reader is in agreement with the basic project I’m advancing. Up until now, I have been trying to persuade those who might not share my view. This now changes and the following chapters (four–six) speak from within a model of a Catholic university to show how things might be otherwise. They are snapshots of a place that is yet to be built by ecclesial communities (together or alone) in democratic societies. They are also snapshots based on various fragmentary practices within existing Christian—and secular—universities. So in chapter four I chose prayer for two reasons. Prayer is hardly ever imagined as part of the methodology of a rigorous academic discipline. I argue that it is precisely this, both in the history of theology until the modern period, and as a necessary epistemological presupposition. Second, I trace the way in which this necessary requirement for the doing of theology actually forces a reconsideration of the traditional disciplinary lines internal to the discipline called “theology.” Theology’s own house needs a spring clean. As the argument proceeds I illustrate instances of the fruitfulness of dissolving traditional boundaries, thereby returning theology to a profounder integration with itself and with other disciplines in a manner not unknown prior to modern university “specialization.” It is this rich dynamic tradition that offers both the Church and the secular world a considered alternative to the dead ends of modernity and postmodernity, while nevertheless recognizing their great strengths.

In chapter five, “The Engagement of Virtue: A Theological Religious Studies,” I return to the discipline of “religious studies” to show what it might look like when theologized. It also allows me to draw together a number of themes. In the early chapters I argued for the practice of virtue for undertaking theology. I return to virtue in a case study of a Christian “saint,” Edith Stein, and a Hindu “goddess,” a sati, Roop Kanwar. I had argued in chapter four that the saint embodies theology, and thus the embodiment of both Stein and Kanwar is my focus here. Their theologically narrated lives generate a painful but challenging conversation regarding virtue and its cross-religious and gendered aspects. Edith Stein’s canonization caused much controversy, leading to a high-level Jewish delegation’s visit to the Pope in an attempt to block the process. A number of important Catholic theologians supported this Jewish plea. Roop Kanwar’s death as a young sati caused horror and revulsion in India and abroad. What might these two women have in common, other than their controversial lives? Virtue? This chapter also exemplifies the sense in which I believe a Christian university and its theologians can reach outwards, engaging creatively and positively, but not uncritically, with all creation—and in this instance, Hinduism.

In chapter six, I develop this theological vision to relate to other disciplines, with philosophy, as mediator, and pay particular attention to physics and cosmology, to see whether fragmentation can be overcome. I chose physics and cosmology as they are often presented as totally unrelated to theology, a discipline that many might think would look entirely similar were it in a secular liberal university or a Catholic university. I hope to show otherwise. Thus, I try to avoid two usual intersections between these subjects: points of conflict, and the need for an ethical or religious stance regarding the use of technology. I also take this test case, not in a search for an overarching philosophy or ideology, but to see whether the unity of all creation, assumed theologically, might promote health, interconnectedness, and developments between different disciplines. In chapter three I had touched on this issue with specific reference to the vision of a “Catholic university” set forth by Pope John Paul II. Chapter six fleshes that out a little, testing papal documents in terms of a specific discipline. If the results look promising, then there are further good reasons to argue for a Catholic university. What can be said of this relationship obviously cannot simply be applied to other disciplines. Carrying out this long meticulous and complex task belongs to the Catholic university and has hardly been started. Such a university’s existence would be invaluable to the Church as it would provide the intellectual life-blood permitting a rich description of what all creation looks like from a Christian perspective. To facilitate this, alongside different views and practices of knowledge (postmodern, modern, Buddhist, Jewish, don’t knows, and so on) will structurally supports real plurality. Only then can we have the debates that are necessary to deal with pluralism, peace, truth, and justice. Without such diversity, there will be little new progress, little challenge from really different alternatives, and in Christian terms, the stifling of a theological voice in the public square.

Acknowledgments

I have been encouraged, helped, and challenged by many people in the writing of this book, only some of whom I mention below. Clifton Cathedral, Bristol, has continued to inspire and nourish me, especially those who work in the Children’s Liturgy Team, as has the Bristol Steiner School. Special thanks also to my colleagues at the University of Bristol in the Department of Theology and Religious Studies, especially Drs. Rupert Gethin and Carolyn Muessig who generously took over as Acting Heads of Department while I had study leave to complete this manuscript. The University of Bristol also awarded me an extra period of study leave to complete this book. I am grateful to the Dean, Dr. Liz Bird, for her support.

Many read or commented on individual chapters that were presented at various universities in Bristol, London, Oxford, Cambridge, Manchester, Exeter, Texas, Boston, Leuven, Rome, and Utrecht. I’m grateful to those who arranged and attended those seminars. I’d like to particularly thank Professor Lewis Ayers, Dr. Tina Beattie, Revd. Barry Chapman, Professor David Conway, Revd. Dr. Philip Endean SJ, Professor Gavin Flood, the late Professor Colin Gunton, Professor Peter Hampson, Dr. Jackie Hirst, Dr. David Jones, the late Dr. I. Julia Leslie, Professor Julius Lipner, Professor David F. Ford, Mr. Davy Machin, Professor George Marsden, Professor Ian Markham, Professor Ernan McMullin, Revd. Dr. Arthur Peacocke, Professor Alvin Plantinga, Professor Sir John Polkinghorne, Dr. Gaynor Pollard, Dr. Sr. Bernadette Porter, Mr. Patrick J. Reilly, Professor Alan Torrance, Dame Janet Trotter, Revd. Professor Keith Ward and Revd. Professor John Webster for their help, often despite strong disagreement. Others read the entire manuscript and made invaluable suggestions and were generous even when in deep opposition. I’d like to thank Canon Professor Edward Bailey, Revd. Catherine Coster, Ms Ann Fowler, Professor Sinclair Goodlad, Professor Paul Griffiths, Revd. Dr. Laurence Hemming, Mrs Tessa Kuin, Dr. Gerard Loughlin, Revd. Dr. Andrew Moore, Dr. Susan Frank Parsons, Professor William L. Portier, Revd. John Sargant, Dr. Chris Sinkinson, Dr. Daniel Strange, Professor Paul Williams, and Revd. Graham Woods. Inevitably, all errors, omissions, and other failings in this book are entirely mine. There would have been many more were it not for such thoughtful critics and friends.

Finally, thank you to Beryl my wife and to Roshan and Sachin our children. To the latter, a new generation, I dedicate this book with gratitude and hope.

(Feast of All Saints, 2004)

Chapter OneTheology’s Babylonian Captivity in the Modern University

I Should “Theology” and “Religious Studies” Be Terminated?

Since this book is concerned with the health of theology and the Church’s engagement with cultures, it might seem rather odd to begin with a question that intimates the termination of theology within the university, the very place that is central to the future of Anglo-American theology. But as the Israelites found out, living in Babylon can have the effect of purifying the faith as well as destroying it. In what follows I shall be suggesting that theology’s location within the modern western secular liberal university is not unlike the Israelite captivity within Babylon. Theology, properly understood, cannot be taught and practiced within the modern university. This is not a view shared by all Christians, but is held by a number of post-liberal theologians and philosophers, such as Stanley Hauerwas, John Milbank, and Alasdair MacIntyre.1

One way of noticing this Babylonian captivity is in the arguments that are conducted in the modern university about the role of theology. The view expressed by some scientific atheists (Richard Dawkins, for example) is that theology has no place in the modern university. It is a vestige of a religious world and society which has long since crumbled and been discredited. It is a disservice to a modern research university to include such a subject in the curriculum.2 A similar voice is heard from some who teach in departments of religious studies. Donald Wiebe, for example, argues that a scientific, objective, rational study of “religion,” without any privilege being granted to any one religion, is the only intellectually respectable practice in the modern university.3 Dawkins and Wiebe have one presupposition in common, which I shall be calling into question: that there is such a thing as neutral objectivity in any mode of research, either science, Dawkins’s own area, or religious studies, Wiebe’s specialism. However, in another sense I agree with Dawkins’s and Wiebe’s conclusions, but for very different reasons. What are these reasons? In the next section of this chapter I want to look at the process of secularization, as it has affected both the university and the discipline of theology. Secularization is a much debated topic, and I use the word to connote two specific historical processes. The foundation of the universities took place in a universe with a sacred canopy, whereby people understood their practices to relate to an organic and cosmic pattern participating in the nature of reality. This reality was divinely created for the good of men and women, for the flourishing of human society, and for participation in truth and love. The modern university, with some exceptions, in contrast, develops its programs and practices without any reference to a sacred canopy. Often finance is the chief criterion, without any organic vision of the relation of the different disciplines, without any shared values regarding the good of men and women, or concerning what truth might possibly be. Augustine, well before the universities were founded, carried out a scathing critique of pagan institutions of learning: their main purpose being vanity in so far as they served purely to gain better employment, and self-promotion.