The Christie Center

Life-Giving and Liberating

HAROLD WELLS

DRBI S GBOOKS

Maryknoll, New York 10545 .-1 .I ~ 1 L) i

' } ' ') '.

i , I

' '

Fo und ed in 1970, Orbis Books end eavors to publish wo rk s th at enlighte n th e mind, nour- ish th e sp irit , and chall enge th e conscience. The publishing arm of th e Marykn oll Fathers and Broth ers, Orb is seeks to ex plore the global dimensions of th e Chri sti an fa ith and mi s- sion, to in vite di alogue with di ve rse cultures and reli gious traditi ons, and to serve th e ca use of reconcili ati on and peace. The books published renect th e opini ons of th eir aut hors and are not mea nt to represent th e offic ial position of th e Maryk noll Soci ety. To obtain more in fo rm ati on about Marykn oll and Orbis Books, please visit our we bsite at www. maryknoll .org.

Published by Orbi s Books, Marykn oll, New York , U.S.A. All ri ghts reserved. No part of thi s pu bli ca ti on may be reprodu ced or transmitted in an y fo rm or by any means, electro ni c or mechanica l, in cluding photocopyin g, recording, or any informatio n storage or retri eva l system, without prior permi ssion in writing fro m th e publi shers. For permi s- sions, write to Orbi s Books, P. 0. Box 308, Marykn oll NY I 0545-0308, U.S. A. Manu fac tured in th e United States of Ameri ca.

Cover art by Ei leen McG uckin , Christ Pantocrator: For more of Ms. McG uckin 's rend i- ti ons of classic ico ns, visit www.sai ntmaryrn agdalen.com or write to The Icon Stud io, 3041 Broa dway, New York . NY 10027.

Libra ry of Congress Cataloging in Publication Da ta

Well s, Haro ld . The Chri sti e ce nter : life-givin g and liberatin g I Haro ld Well s. p. cm. In cludes index. ISBN 1-57075-569-8 (pbk .) I. Jes us Chri st- Person and offi ces. 2. Theo logy. I. Titl e. BT203. W4 5 2004 230- dc 22 20040065 12 For Patricia

SIN E QUA NON CONTENTS

Acknowledgments xi

Introduction 1

Part I REFLECTIONS ON REVELATION, FAITH , AND RATIONALITY

Chapter I Criteria of Theological Adequacy 11 Th e Prax is Criteri on and the Chri sti e Center 13 Life, Liberation, and th e Chri st 15 Primary and Second ary Criteri a of Theological Adequacy I 7 Is It Reasonabl e? 18 A Bew il dering Plu ra lity of Th eologies 18 What Is a "Theology"? 23 Nonrati onal Factors in th e Choice of a Theological Method 27 Di alogue within a Fa ith Community 31 An Intra-Faith Conve rsati on 33

Chapter 2 Revelation and Faith: The Knowledge of God as Gift 38 " It Was a Revelati on' " Sh e Said 38 Vocati on, Promise, Word Event 42 Conversati on 43 Conversati on 47 Jesus .as Reve lati on 52 Faith, Not Si ght 54 Conversation 55 Conversation 59 Th e Radical Di sjunction of Fa ith and Reason 65 Conversation 68

V II viii Contents

Chapter 3 Faith as Rational 80 What Is Rati onality? 80 Th e Chall enge to Rat ionality in a Postmodern Context 83 Not Found ati onali sm 92 Not Fid eism 100 Conve rsa tion 100 Theo logy as a Rational Discipline 108

Part II THE CHRISTOLOGICAL CRITERION

Chapter 4 Is It Founded in Jesus C hrist? 117 Not A Priori 11 7 The Whole Chri st 120 The Chri st-centeredn ess of Chr is ti an Worship and Life 122 Can We Be Cosmocentri c or Centered in Creati on? 126 Th e Vari ety of Chri stocentri c Theologies 131 A Note on Method fo r Chri stology 135

Chapter 5 Apologia for the Christie Center: The Mission and Identity of Jesus Christ 137 l. The crucifi ed Jes us is ra ised from the dead and so establi shed as th e Christ, who brings God's reign of j ustice and peace. 138 2. Jes us is Emm anu el, the presence of th e vulnerabl e God with us, trul y God and truly hum an. 148 3. Jes us, as Savi our, meets us in our sin and guilt, offering forgiveness and reconcili ati on, undermining our self-righteousness, and inspirin g a li fe of gratitude. 156 4. Jesus reveals th e tri une God, the etern al communi on of love, ground of our hope. 168

Chapter 6 The Challenge of the Pluralist Theologies 181 Working Di stinctions (a nd Their Limitati ons) 182 John 1-1 ick 184 Wil fred Cantwell Smith 190 An ln terreli gious Conve rsati on 194 Paul F. Knitter 20 l Contents ix

Part Ill OTHER INDISPENSABLE CRITERIA OF THEOLOGICAL ADEQUACY

Chapter 7 Is It Biblical? 213 A Posteriori 214 Not Oppressive Bibli cism 216 Conversa ti on 217 "Canon" of " ln spired" Scripture 21 9 Other Scriptures 224 Auth ori ty of Scripture: Sola Scriptura 227 Reading Scripture Criti call y 231 Conversa ti on 23 1 1-l erm eneutica l Circ ul arity 235

Chapter 8 Is It Contextual'? 240 "Now That Was a Brea th of Fresh Air'" I-l e Said 240 The Auth ori ty of Contex t and Ex peri ence 242 Producti on of Meanin g 246 Contemporan eity and Global Contex t 248 Contemporaneity in the Bib le and Traditi on 25 3 The Contextuality of Pl ace and Circ um stance 257 Encounter on Ascension Day 262 Conve rsa ti on 263 Conversati on Analys is 267

Chapter 9 Is It Ecclesial? 270 The Ambiguity of "Tradition" 271 Tradition as Context 27 3 Conversati on 275 Tradition and Scripture 276 Creeds, Dogmas, and Teaching Office 28 1 Uni ty, Cath oli city and Ec um eni city 286

Postscript 289 Conversati on 290

Notes 294

Index 329

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My th anks, first, to Patri cia, my sine qua 11011, th e first reader and critic of these pages, compani on and conversationa li st in a ll th ings. A Christian educator and author, no obscura ntism or un clarity escapes Pat's eye. Many thanks are due to my great fr iend John McTavish, seni or pastor at Huntsville, O ntari o, dra matist, actor, pro ducer/director of musical productions, and no mean theologian, who read th e who le manuscript care full y and offered many suggesti ons fo r im provement, especia ll y to the di alogues. I thank him not least fo r remind ing me of Ki erkegaard! Two academi c coll eagues have read my work cri ticall y and offered, w ith great kindness, important correcti on and encouragement: Professor Doug las John Ha ll of McGill Un iversity in Montreal, and Professor Don Schweitzer of St. Andrew's Coll ege, Saskatoon. My warmest thanks to them fo r sharing w ith me their expertise and wisdom. I am particul arl y grateful to students of my first-year introducti on to sys- te mati c theology and my third-year course in doctrine at Emmanuel Coll ege, who read (assigned) selected chapters of the manuscri pt and gave me help fu l feedback. Since they, after a ll , represent the intended audience of the book, both affirmations and cri tical suggesti ons were very important. I am indebted also to numerous men and women who have been my faculty coll eagues fo r over twenty years in the ri ch environment of Emmanuel Coll ege and Toronto School of Theology. Their conversati on and coll eagueship over many coffees, beers, lu nches, and in countless meetings of supervisory, compre- hensive, and thesis-proposal meetings have been cha ll enging, stimulating, and supporti ve. I also owe much to teaching and research assistants whose work over the last several years has freed me up and sometimes been complementary to my own: Karl Koop, Tracy Trothen, Derek Parry, David Zub, Mark Rutledge, Nestor Medina, Rob Fenne ll , Emmanuel Ofori . I am grateful to the numerous Korean graduate students I have worked w ith, who have sharpened my sense o f "contextuality" in theology. I am indebted to every master's and doctoral student I have di rected, who, in the process of being educated, also educated their super- visor. Not least I happily ackn owledge th at the questions, cha ll enges, and in sights of a ll my stu dents are a constant stimulati on to the never- ending, excit- in g task of th eology. The work would never have been completed w ithout a sabbati cal, gener- ously granted by Emmanuel Coll ege/Victoria Uni versity and its fi ne leaders:

XI xii Acknowledgments

Principal Peter Wyatt and President Paul Gooch. Their encouragement and sup- port for sc holarly research are greatly appreciated. My thanks also to Robert Ell sberg and Bill Burrows, editor-in -chi ef and academic editor of Orbis Boo ks, and their hi ghly professional sta ff, for the many fin e books they brin g to press (so many of whi ch are fo und in the notes of thi s book) and fo r their hard wo rk and kind encouragement in their assessment and pu bli catio n of thi s book. INTRODUCTION

We need a faith th at is li fe-g iving and liberating. In our world of the earl y twenty-first century, whi ch suffe rs so profoundly fro m fea r, injustice, and vi o- lence, we long fo r a so lid rock on whi ch to stand, wisdom th at chall enges, gui des, and in spires. We need a constructi ve, humani zing C hri sti anity that li ves for jus- ti ce and peace, that fosters sustainable ways of li ving. And we need a Christi anity that is ra tio na ll y persuasive to peopl e of our tim e. T he task of Christi an theology, as ever, is to in fo rm the church's preaching, teaching, and mi ssion fo r particular ti mes, pl aces, and ci rcumstances. This book attempts a modest contri- bution to th e ongo in g process of thinking and rethinki ng C hristi an fa ith , foc us- ing on the connection of theologica l meth od and christo logy. T he connecti on is obvious, bu t not often expounded thoroughl y and explicitl y. Theological method, of course, has to do with the questi on of the knowledge o f God, and si nce C hristi ans beli eve they know God through Jesus Christ, meth od and christology must be in timately related. In thi s book l argue that Jesus the C hri st is centra l and fo undati onal fo r all of Christi an faith and Chri sti an action, and therefore also fo r Christi an theology. The rather unusual term Christie center emphasizes th e point th at it is the very person of Christ and not chri sto logy as such that is centra l. A lthough the cen- trality of C hri st fo r Chri sti an fa ith may seem obvious and beyond debate to a great many people, it is necessary to argue th is today, over again st a number o f signifi cant contemporary th eologies that would de-center Christ in the li fe and fa ith of th e church. In some circles, both in liberal Protestantism and Roman Catholi cism, "christocentrism" has become a pejorati ve word . Histori c Chris- ti ani ty, presumably centered in Christ, has often been arrogant and imperi ali sti c toward other reli gions or ali en cul tures, overwhelming ly sexist, and has helped shape atti tudes that contributed to the destructi on of the natura l enviro nment. Thus we have the " th eocentri c," or "Reali ty-centered," or "soteri ocentric" theologies th at emphasize interreli gious dialogue; also the "creati on-centered" or "cosmocentric" theologies that stress the ecological concerns and the sacredness of Earth, as well as fe minist theologies, some of which would describe themselves as experi entiall y based, and therefore " li fe-" or "survival-centered." All o f these concern s- interreli gious understanding and reconciliation, fe minism, and the well-being o f the natura l environment- are strongly affi rmed here. We need theology of interre li g ious dialogue, feminist theology, and ecological theology, 2 The Christie Center and we urgentl y need them to be broadl y appropriated by Christian people. l will contend th at, fo r Chri stians, these are most successfu ll y defend ed from w ithin a Christ-centered perspective. T he inadequate and destructive "traditional" theologies referred to have not been excessively centered in Christ; on the contrary, they have fa il ed to all ow Jes us Christ to be normati ve and have permitted cul- tu ra l, philosophi cal, or ideological forces to reign in th eology. I contend here th at it is in and thro ugh Jesus th at we fi nd our tru e li fe and liberati on. If this were not so, there woul d be no good reason to continue to call him "the Christ" or to continue to call ourselves "Christ-ians." O ur Christi an kn owledge of God and li fe in God fi ows preemin entl y fro m Jesus Christ, cruci fi ed and ri sen, who is God 's own self-gift and self-disclosure. All of our C hristian thought, therefore, coheres in him and fi nds its inner rationality in him . Because he di scloses to us the di vin e reality and pu rpose, Jesus frees us fro m obeisance to a ll oppressive ido ls and tyrannical overl ords and in spires emancipatory acti vity at both systemic and personal levels. In our tim e, when the global market, served by violence, is worshi ped as god, Jesus Christ gives us a better direction fo r a more deeply li ved and more sustainabl e li fe in thi s world. Jn the face of terrorism, whether the massive violence of great nations or of desperate, angry men, Jesus Chri st gives us a way of reconcili ati on, forgiveness, and hope in the face of death . A theology of grace centered in Jesus is abl e to save us from the self-righteousness that spawns so much arrogance and hatred in our fragil e world . T he cho ice of th e word s " life-giving" and "liberating" in the title indicates th at the meth od I propose here stands w ithin the young tradition of liberationi st theologies. By " liberati on-isl'' (or sometimes "liberati ve") I mean, broadly speaking, the wide ra nge of criti cal liberation, fe minist, ecological , gay/lesbi an, and postcoloni al theologies, that is, the contextual and political theologies th at have multiplied and fi ourished as a substantial minority movement throughout the world wide ecumeni cal church since the late 1960s. Liberation theology (including that of Latin Ameri ca) is just one of the many liberation isl theologies. These th eologies by no means constitute a monoli thic school, since their very raison d 'etre is to address the gospel message contextually to many di ffe rent places and circumstances. While they di ffer among themselves substantially in their methods, they all share a methodological commitment to relate theologi- call y to the experi ences of oppressed and marg inali zed peopl e, and they are gu ided in their scriptura l interpretati ons, doctrinal formulati ons, and social analyses by some version of the "option fo r the poor. " They w ish to engage the resources of the Christi an fa ith fo r a peaceful, equalitarian, just, and ecologicall y sustainable world, stri vin g in all th eir theological work to keep these concerns at the forefront. Another way to characterize these theologies in their commonality is to speak of "critical" th...eo logy. 1 Cri tical theologies are alert to the social im pli- cati ons of doctrines and th e practical, cultura l, and poli tical consequences of theology and ecclesial li fe. In thi s book I prefer to emphasize the more positi ve terms, both of them centra l to biblical fai th : life and liberation. Introduction 3

The authority and power of Jesus to liberate, known so well to black slaves and other oppressed and margi na li zed people, derive (J will argue) essentially and primari ly from the fact that he was raised up from death, so that, as the black slaves sang, "Jesus won't die no mo'."2 In the earliest times, too, slaves and other victims of the Roman Empire found hope in this cru cifi ed and risen one. The purity and holiness of hi s love, hi s courage and compassion , evoke our adoration, but they do so retrospective ly in the li ght of hi s resurrection. It is precisely the power of the resurrection, gentle and hidden though it is, to save and give hope that has always moved Chri stians, from the earliest times to the present, to see Chri st as the disclosure and in carnation of the divine Wisdom and Word. That is why, in chapter 5, I begin christological renecti on with the resurrection. Yet it is also Jesus' death as the ho ly one of Goel , detained, tortured, and executed, that qualifies him to speak to all the poor and violated. It was his clear partisanship for them, togeth er with hi s grace-filled message about Goel , that evokes the love and worship of Christians on the underside. If African American slaves, both female and male, subj ect to the most extreme forms of misery and humiliation, sought to "steal away to Jesus," if, as Dwight Hopkins tells us, "the slaves were radically centered on Jesus,"3 middle-class white C hri stians should take notice. Like most works of theology, this is a polemical book. I have a number of undisgu ised axes to grind. I will contend that some ways of doing theology are better and more " rational" than others, and that theologians should never g ive up on the claim to be reasonable. Theology must be reasoned, disciplined thought. This implies a broad definition of the rational (discussed in chapter 3) th at allows theology to be in dialogue with other di sciplines of thought. This concern is not unconnected to our concern for Ii fe and liberation, since the rational has every- thing to do with th e practical, as well as with the intellectual and theoretical. The oppressed and poor, bei ng up against the extremities of existence, may be more rational than most others in their pursuit of God's truth. Since faith for them is a matter of survival, th ey cannot afford to get it wrong. The center and foundation of practical Christian life and freedom- Jesus C hrist- must also, then, be the center and foundation of Christian thought. At the same time, our theology must be intentionally contemporary and contextual. No contradiction exists between Christ-centeredness and contextuality, or experi- ence, or liberation. Our belong ing to Christ and being centered in him are not some kind of tight straightjacket. "All things are yours," says Paul, since "you belong to C hrist and Christ belongs to God" ( I Cor 3 :2 1, 23). Thus, a theology truly based and centered in Chri st will be acutely contextual and genuinely lib- erative. Moreover, to argue for a Christ-centered theolog ical method one does not need to be christomonistic, that is, so totally focused on C hrist as to neglect the Trinity or the Holy Spirit; nor need it imply the neglect of a theology of cre- ation. Rather, to be centered on the Christ is to in sist that Jesus, in the power of the Spirit, is the concrete visibility of the triune Creator God among us. Jesus embodies God's reign of justice and peace. He is God's own tang ible self- 4 The Christie Center di sclosure or revelat ion , the in -carnation, within created fl esh, of God's agape and grace. It is imposs ibl e, th erefore, to argue fo r a Chri st- cente red meth od without at the sa me tim e ex pl oring th e identi ty and mi ssion of Jesus Christ him self. That is, methodology, or "prolegomenon" to th eology, mu st itself be th eologica l. We cannot begin with some "meta-meth odo logy," outside of actual fa ith and theo logy, to talk about how to do theo logy fa ithfu ll y. As Karl Barth has taught us, no higher pl atform or deeper fo undat ion ex ists that could prescribe for th eo logy how theology should be done. Hence we ca nn ot speak in a pu re ly fo rm al, epi stemologi- cal mann er about revelation and faith without addressi ng related soterio logical and chris tologica l issues. Chapter 2 is a substantive di sc uss ion of revelati on, and chapte r 5 of the ident ity and mi ss ion of Jesus Chri st with particul ar foc us on hi s signi fica nce for knowl edge of God and th eologica l method. The centering of Chri sti ans and of Christian worshi p and mi ssion in Jes us Chri st impli es th e uniqueness of Jes us- the utter uniqueness of thi s human bein g, whom alone we ca ll Emmanuel. Thi s is the one in whom we trust, the one whom we fo ll ow and in wh om we hope. That is, we relate to him as to God. Jn Jes us alone we find God's ow n being enacted in the acts of a hum an being. In Jesus' li fe , ministry, death , and resurrecti on, we find God 's own human ex istence. But one mu st be ca reful about polemi cs. A basic convicti on underl ying thi s book is that contemporary theology is pl agued by a number of fa lse di chotomi es and by "party spiri t." Readers may be surprised to fi nd thi s auth or drawing positi ve ly upon auth ors or theologies that seem to be quite di ffe rent. How can I quote with enthusiasm fro m Karl Barth, T. F. Torra nce, Hans Frei, and Will iam Placher, yet also fro m Douglas John Hall , Jon Sobrino, Eli zabeth Johnson, and Kim Yong-B ok? How ca n we apprec iate, at th e sa me tim e, the work of George Gra nt, Letty Ru sse ll , James Cone, Ji.irge n Moltmann , and Gregory Baum? 1 regard all of these, togeth er with a number of hi stori ca l fi gures (such as the Cap- padocian fa thers, Luther, Kie rk egaard) as my teachers through thei r written works, and their insights will frequently be ci ted here. While there are deep sim- il ariti es among these auth ors, it wo uld be fat uous to suggest that these people all agreed (or that they would all concur wi th what I write here) either about theologica l method or about chri stology, or that their work can be comfortably har- moni zed. One can lea rn much and partly agree with auth ors with whom one is not parti cul arl y ali gned. Eli sabeth Schi.i ssler Fiorenza, Rosemary Radfo rd Ruether, and Wilfred Ca ntwell Smith have much to teach us. The reader will also find here sharpl y criti ca l comments on such fi gures as George Lindbeck, Chung Hyun Kyung, Sa ll ie McFague, Thomas Berry, and Paul Knitter, but 1 hope it will be ev ident that, while disagreeing with them, I grea tl y appreciate their work. The chall enge they bring to the churches is trul y a gift. One does not wish to pro pose some fac ile ecl ec ti cism th at dilutes the cogency of these diverse contempora ry thin ke rs. But too much theology goes on in academi c ghettoes, where theologians of one stripe li sten onl y to one another while despi sing members of other lntrod11ctio11 5 schoo ls of thought. I beli eve that all of these di verse thinkers, and many others, have importa nt contributi ons to make to th e holi sti c theo logy we need in our tim e. But just how important is theo logical meth od? Obvi ously I think it ex tremely important, most especiall y fo r those who are call ed to lead , preach, and teach in the decades to co me. If th eo logical students are to learn to think theologica ll y for th emselves (rath er than merely im bibe the theo logies of their teachers) fo r th e sake of mini stri es in a ra pidl y changin g world , methodologica l refl ection is absolu te ly essenti al. The articul ati on of conte nt needs to be di sci- plined and guided by expli cit, inte ntional meth od, so th at meth od contributes to and clari fies co ntent. I do not entirely sym pathi ze, therefore, with the comm ent of Je ffrey Stout "Preoccupation with meth od is like clea ring yo.ur throat: it ca n go on fo r onl y so long before you lose your audi ence. "4 Of co urse, we must not get stalled in qu esti ons of method and never get on with it. But even as we do so, we have to keep one eye on what we are do ing and how we are doin g it. l have little sy mpath y as we ll with th e decision of Jli rgen Moltman n (though l greatly admire hi s work) to articul ate hi s meth od substanti all y only at the encl of a seri es of theologica l vo lum es. 5 l f one hopes to persuade one's reader about theological stances, th at reader must be ke pt in formed of how one proceeds and reaches con- clu sions. Preachers and pastors also, if they hope to convince and lead the intelli gent peo pl e in their pews, must know how to be accountabl e for the theological stances th ey take, and thi s req ui res intenti onal th eologica l method . Readers will qui ckl y noti ce so mething not often fo und in academic theological works: a number of more-or-l ess fi cti onal di alogues re fl ectin g (and imper- fec tl y remembering) th eologica l conversati ons in whi ch I have parti cipated or whi ch l have overh eard. l am in good company here. Old Anse lm , after all , put theologica l argum ents into conve rsati ons with Boso! Abelard too (recounting a dream he had had) created an interfa ith di alogue between a philosopher, a Jew, and a Chri stian 16 And th ey in turn were taking a leaf fro m th at master of rational discourse Socrates . My use of dialogues here indicates my conviction that theology is not primaril y fo r academi cs, but is a lively, real li fe activity in which all Chri sti ans engage. Th eology happens in community, wh ere people struggle together to understand th eir fa ith: in Bible stud y and prayer groups; in commit- tees of churches at local, nati onal, and intern ati onal levels; in confi rmation classes; in pastoral care; and in conversations among fr iends. Sometim es it happens in moments of tragedy or in th e heat of urgent activity, when li fe-and-death decisions have to be made. Academi c theology ex ists to serve Chri sti an people in thei r need to li ve the li fe of di sc ipl eship and to understand and arti culate their fa ith. Th e di alogues here attempt to illustrate the practi cal and ex istenti al signif- icance of theo logical questions and aim to stimulate similar di scussion among th eology students and church members. The di alogues in fac t refl ect my own memories of doing theology, or of hearin g it done, in va ri ous situations. They are also meant to heighte n our awareness of th e personal limitati ons and perspecti ves 6 The Christie Center

that are part of all refl ecti on. Autobiographical, experi ential, and contextual ele- ments (such as one finds in actua l conversati ons) are inevitably woven in to theological re fl ecti on, and being conscious o f th at is crucial for " mitigating theology's slide into obj ecti vely atrophied forms of teaching."7 Of course, I speak out of particul ar personal experiences and perspecti ves. And so, to locate myself for the reader, in order th at she or he may identi fy the source o f my prejudices and predispositi ons, I sha ll indulge briefl y in auto- bi ographical comment.

Raised in a Canadi an working-c lass fa mily in the industria l c ity of Hamil- ton, O ntario, I was taken by my mother for a short time to a Salvati on Army Sun- day School because she and my matern al grandparents were Salvati oni sts. I can still remember sin gin g children's hy mns th ere ("Jesus Loves Me," "Jesus Bids Us Shine," "Tell Me the Sto ri es of Jesus"). But fo r most of my childhood and adolescence I was nurtured in fa ith in th e United Church of Canada, a more middle-class and quite liberal Protestant denominati on, fo rmed in 1925 by a union of Methodi sts, Presbyteri ans, and Congregati ona li sts. My other grandparents were devout Methodi sts before church union, and I have a sense o f indebtedness to that tradition of warmhearted pi ety. I am aware now how importa nt our local church was to a rather precoc ious, sensitive child: its kind and intelli gent, relati vely conservati ve minister, who stayed through all my growing- up years and shaped my th eology fu ndamentall y; th e dedicated Sunday School teachers, whom J still remember well ; Boy Scouts; and youth Bible study. A Sun- day School song, sung in a dark room as we gazed at a large screen showing a (rather caucasian) head of Jesus, still pl ays in my head from time to time:

Turn your eyes upon Jesus Look full in hi s wonderfu l face And the things of this world w ill grow strangely dim In the li ght of hi s glory and grace

By the ti me I reached sixteen, 1 was running the projector and my girlfriend was pl aying the pi ano. My chri stocentrism may be rooted there. I suppose it could be seen as highl y effective " indoctrinati on." Nevertheless, as I grew up I was surrounded by enough skepticism (that of my fa ther and vari ous fri ends, aris ing out of the miseri es of the depression, tubercul osis, and the war) that I was capable of questi oning Christi anity and of passing th rough some years of rather cyni cal agnosti cism in my later youth. But I had loved Chri stianity and fo und it painful to set it asid e. When 1 was still an undergraduate 1 read Paul Tillich and appreciated hi s thought about despair and the demonic. He gave me a g limpse of an in tell ectualy respectabl e C hristian ity and opened me up to th e possibility of Introduction 7 the "dynamics of fa ith." But it was fi nall y a Chri st-cente red theology of th e cross and of th e suffe ring of God, offered by an intelli ge nt, powerful preacher, th at met (bu t never resolved) my persistent questions about ev il and suffe rin g. The Uni ted Church ca rries fo rwa rd in va ri ous ways th e heritages of its fo unding trad iti ons, in cluding both the liberal social gospel and neo-orthodox thrusts of the ea rl y and mid-t wentieth century. l appreciate now that th e liberal- it y of th e United Church ass ured that J was never tempted to biblical fundamen- tali sm and alw ays ass umed th e va lidity of criti ca l biblical studi es and of open-min ded questi oning. But as an undergradu ate at McMaster Uni versity, I was inspired by th e teachin g of George Grant, a co lourful and larger- than-life (A ngli can) Chri sti an intell ectual. He was a soc ial ist when I fi rst knew him, yet also a dee pl y conservat ive, nati onali st politi ca l philosoph er and cri tic of moder- nity. He aroused in me a suspi cion of th e casual optimi sm of all things easil y "liberal." Afterwa rds my th eo logical edu cati on at Emm anuel Coll ege in Toronto, and later gradu ate studi es at Edinburgh, could be characteri zed as essenti all y Barthi an or, more broadl y, neo-orthodox, co nfirming, in different ways, my suspi cion of th e superfi ciality of wh at is merely modern . Th e deepenin g darkness of recent world events in my later life has confirmed an ori entati on to theo logy of the cross learn ed in ve ry diffe rent ways fro m both Grant and Barth . Yet, th ro ugh other in flu ences, incl uding that of my workin g-class fa mily and ea rl y ex peri ences in the sphere of meni al labour, I was always keenl y aware of social injustice and th erefore felt an imm edi ate interest in the social gospel as we ll. I am still convinced that the neo-orthodox theologies offered an important correcti ve to the ra ther "thin" libera l theo logies th at preceded them, and from my ea rl y years in ministry I so ught to hold togeth er the best of Barth and Reinhold Ni ebuhr with social gospel heroes, especiall y Canadi an Chri sti an sociali st leaders J. S. Woodsworth and Tomm y Douglas . Carry ing thi s combined Ba rthi an and social gospel app roach into pastora l ministry, l soon fo und that the hope theo logy and the post-Auschwitz theofogia crucis of Ji.irgen Moltmannn carri ed both a depth and a rel evance that I felt enri ched my own fa ith and my preaching and practi ca l work in the earl y 1970s. As a pastor, I was always in vo lved in minor ways in parti san politi cal activity. Go ing back fo r doctora l studi es at McG ill and intensive study of Paul Ri coeur, I was prepared fo r a uni versity and seminary ministry in southern Africa. Five years at the Uni ve rsity of Lesoth o, both as lecturer in th eo logy and as chaplain/pastor, brought with it an un comfo rtabl e prox imi ty to severe poverty and political oppression. Th ese were criti cal years in the struggle against apartheid in neigh- bourin g South Afri ca. There I was constantl y chall enged to preach and teach a meaningfu l message to devout yo ung African Christi ans who, while th ey loved Jesus, were seri ously skepti ca l about the ro le and place of Chri sti ani ty and the church in their struggle fo r equality and a decent life. There I fo und that the South Afri ca n, Ameri ca n bl ack, and Latin Ameri can liberati on theo logies were exciting, chall enging, and profoundl y relevant , for both teaching and preaching. At that 8 The Christie Center time (late ' 70s, ea rl y '80s) the theologies of Des mond Tutu, All an Boesak and James Cone, and of th e La tin Ameri cans- Gu stavo Guti errez, Ju an Lui s Segundo, Jan Sobrino, and Jose Miguez Bo nin o--as well as the active proximity of the Afri ca n Nati onal Congress and a congregation made up of poor vill agers, students, and uni versity fac ulty chall enged both teacher and students. Wh at made these theologies chall engin g and acceptabl e to devout Afri ca n Chri sti ans was th at they were not simpl y modern and Western , but ex hibited an undiluted chri stocentri sm, rooted in the beloved scriptures and joined to acute and prophetic social analys is and politi cal commitment. Chri sti an students were severely chall enged by Marxist students and fac ulty, and many of them became "Chri sti an Marxists. " Jn th is atmosphere it was great fun to teach a course fo r und ergraduates on Chris- ti anity and Marxism and Chri sti an- Marxist dialogue. Members of my congregati on, being on the wrong side of th e governm ent, were apt to be pi cked up and jailed, so metim es beaten and tortured. Pastoral responsibility included attempting to visit them, advocating fo r them, and encourag ing and conso ling them. l myself (as an ex patri ate, togeth er with my wife and children) suffered onl y the honour of being bann ed from enterin g the Republic of South Africa. Since that time, as a pastoral mini ster and th en a professor of theology in Canada, I have attempted to join th eological ministry with commitment to va ri ous politi ca l ca uses, as a (minor) parti cipant in the New Democratic Party, th e peace movement, and th e outreach work of the na tional and local church. After many years of teaching students for ministry (including many Korean, African, as well as Canadi an gradu ate students, who have taught me so much), I am convinced that it is a criti cal, liberationi st theo logy, unapol ogeticall y centered in Chri st, th at best guides our di sc ipl eship and gives integrity, identity, and a pl ace to stand .