Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects The Unsettled Church: The Search for Identity and Relevance in the Ecclesiologies of Nicholas Healy, Ephraim Radner, and Darrell Guder Emanuel D. Naydenov Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, and the Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons Recommended Citation Naydenov, Emanuel D., "The Unsettled Church: The Search for Identity and Relevance in the Ecclesiologies of Nicholas Healy, Ephraim Radner, and Darrell Guder" (2015). Dissertations (1934 -). 527. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/527 THE UNSETTLED CHURCH: THE SEARCH FOR IDENTITY AND RELEVANCE IN THE ECCLESIOLOGIES OF NICHOLAS HEALY, EPHRAIM RADNER, AND DARRELL GUDER by Emanuel D. Naydenov, MDiv. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2015 ABSTRACT THE UNSETTLED CHURCH: THE SEARCH FOR IDENTITY AND RELEVANCE IN THE ECCLESIOLOGIES OF NICHOLAS HEALY, EPHRAIM RADNER, AND DARRELL GUDER Emanuel D. Naydenov, MDiv. Marquette University, 2014 This dissertation examines the efforts of three contemporary theologians whose work is a part of the search for a new methodology for doing ecclesiology located on the continuum between the Church’s identity and relevance. They are the Catholic theologian Nicholas Healy, Anglican theologian Ephraim Radner, and Presbyterian theologian Darrell Guder. They come to the subject matter from different ecclesiological backgrounds, and, as such, their work can be taken as representative in as much as it stands for their unique efforts to theologize within their own traditions and contexts. By critiquing and analyzing their proposals I will bring them into dialog which will yield what I hope are the contours of a new way of thinking about ecclesiology. In my study of their ecclesiological proposals I examine first their approach to the Holy Scriptures relative to their search for the Church’s identity. Special attention will be given to Christological and Pneumatological concerns, but also to the role of corporate and individual repentance (or conversion), as a means of re-appropriating one’s true identity as Church. Second, I take a critical look at their proposals of how the Church’s identity can and should enable its practical embodiment in the context of the 21st Century’s marketplace of ideas and be expressed in its God-given mission, i.e., the Church’s relevance. Then, based on a careful examination of the postmodern context, I argue that the aforementioned theologians represent the emergence of a new methodological axis, namely the one defined by “identity and relevance,” for doing ecclesiology. I will argue that this methodological axis gives rise to a new model, which I will call, “missional ecclesiology.” My critical evaluation of this new methodology concludes with an evaluation of its potential viability arguing in favor of missional ecclesiology as a viable model. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Emanuel D. Naydenov, MDiv. First and foremost, I would like to express my profound gratitude to the Marquette University Graduate School and to the Theology Department in particular for affording me the opportunity to pursue doctoral studies as part of a world-class program and under the tutelage of world-class faculty. When I first arrived at Marquette in the autumn of 2000, I was filled with excitement and energy looking forward to tackling deep theological topics such as “election” and “the Trinity,” or mastering the works of great theologians such as Karl Barth or Jürgen Moltmann. The last thing I expected was writing a dissertation devoted to the doctrine of the Church. As an ordained minister and someone who comes from a family that has produced a total of 10 ministers in the last four generations, I was pretty convinced that there was no aspect of ecclesiology that I had not mastered either by personal experience or by witnessing the ministry of others in my family. I thought I knew well what was involved in the ministry of the Church, and I did not find it intellectually stimulating to sustain my interest over the course of my studies. But, I did proceed with my original plan and studied “election” and the “Trinity,” along with Barth and Moltmann, and I was excited and content. Gradually, however, a realization begin to emerge: that all of the profound doctrines of the Christian faith I was studying in-depth made full sense only in the context of the life of the Christian community called the Church. This realization was further strengthened by the discovery that the theologians I have come to respect and admire the most such as Congar and deLubac, Küng and Dulles, Nissiotis and Bulgakov, ii Barth and Moltmann, dedicated their entire lives’ works to the Church, thus becoming, in a very true sense, doctors of the Church. So I had to take notice, and in response, at first somewhat reluctantly but with growing interest later, I signed up for classes in ecclesiology under the teaching of Father Michael Fahey. His soft-spoken style of engaging and encouraging combined with his undying excitement and unwavering commitment to the Church universal were contagious. I must have picked up the “ecclesiological bug” from him, for here I am years later finishing my first humble contribution to the field of ecclesiology. For this, I am in his debt! Special thanks is due to my Doctoral Adviser and Dissertation Director Dr. Lyle Dabney, who was the first to take a chance on a young and untested applicant from Eastern Europe who was short on tradition but eager to learn. From him, I learned one of the most important lessons a theologian can learn: that theology should always be done “in context.” I hope that my dissertation pays him a small tribute for this most valuable insight. I owe him a debt of gratitude for his unlimited patience, his gracious encouragement and wise counsel, and for not giving up on me even in the face of my serious personal challenges, which were not part of the plan but became a part of the process. The completion of my dissertation is a tribute to Dr. Dabney’s perseverance as much as it is to mine. I will never forget his kindness toward me and his faith in me! I am also particularly grateful to my dissertation committee members Dr. Patrick Carey, the late Dr. Ralph Del Colle, Dr. D. Stephen Long and Dr. Deirdre A. Dempsey, all professors of mine whom I deeply respect and admire. To me, they are all shining examples of excellent scholarship, Christian humility and service, and dedication to teaching and their students. I will always strive to emulate what I have learned from all of iii them! Special thanks go to Dr. Carey for his gentle and deliberate encouragement. His kind words and encouraging feedback on a Brownson paper made me believe for the first time in my academic career that I just might be capable of scholarly work. I owe an equal debt of gratitude to the late Dr. Del Colle whose encouragement has meant so much to me over the years. Even a week before his untimely passing he sent me an email to inquire about my wife’s health, assure me of his prayers for my family, and urge me to persevere in the writing of my dissertation. I cannot think of a more genuine example of a true Christian character than Dr. Del Colle, whose kindness I will not forget. I am also very grateful to Drs. Long and Dempsey, who, when asked, did not hesitate for a moment to serve on my dissertation committee regardless of the short notice, the myriad other commitments on their schedules, and the fact that I had not had the privilege of submitting myself to their teaching. Their kindness and encouragement throughout this process are most appreciated. I am truly honored to have scholars of their stature on my dissertation committee. Last, but not least, I owe a debt of profound gratitude to my dear wife Nellie, who stood by me, encouraged and understood me, was infinitely patient, and loved me regardless throughout this long journey. She was first to suggest the idea that I should pursue doctoral studies in theology, and I am so thankful that 20 years later she can see her prophetic words brought to fruition. I dedicate this work to my wife Nellie, and to my children Martin and Christine whose many sacrifices and unfailing love sustained me to the end. A special word of thanks here also goes to my brother Rev. Evgeniy D. Naydenov, a dedicated pastor and a capable theologian in his own right, who was the first iv to show me the value of reading Scripture not just as a devotional but as a theological document. Finally, I am grateful to God for His sustaining grace and loving kindness. I owe Him everything. To Him be the glory! v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i INTRODUCTION Introductory Matters……………………………………………………..1 What is this Dissertation About?...............................................................3 Why is this Study Important?....................................................................4 How Will this Investigation Proceed?.......................................................8 CHAPTER ONE: THE “IDENTITY-RELEVANCE” AS METHODOLOGICAL AXIS FOR DOING ECCLESIOLOGY……………………………………………...13 Introductory Matters…………………………………….......…………13 The Question of Method in Ecclesiology…………………………........16 Roger Haight on Ecclesiological