DOCSLIB.ORG

Union Theological Seminary the CONTINUING RELEVANCE of KARL BARTH's CRITIQUE of LIBERAL THEOLOGY a Report Presented in Partial F

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Union Theological Seminary the CONTINUING RELEVANCE of KARL BARTH's CRITIQUE of LIBERAL THEOLOGY a Report Presented in Partial F Union Theological Seminary THE CONTINUING RELEVANCE OF KARL BARTH'S CRITIQUE OF LIBERAL THEOLOGY A Report Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Divinity at Union Theological Seminary Dr. James Cone and Dr. Gary Dorrien by Stephen Joseph Sarma-Weierman April 10, 2015 APRIL 10, 2015 CONTENTS THE CONTINUING RELEVANCE OF KARL BARTH'S CRITIQUE …................................... 1 Introduction: Karl Barth and the Mainline Church Today 1 Modern Protestant Theology and the Early Barth 5 Barth's Disenchantment 10 Barth in Dialogue 13 Rudolph Bultmann 13 Paul Tillich 18 Moving Beyond Liberalism and Barth 21 The Task of Theology: Some Preliminary Thoughts on Ecclesiology 26 The Failure of Liberal Theology to Become Liberation Theology 28 Supernaturalism Revisited 34 Re-Imagining the Church by Building Upon the Three-fold Word of God 36 Revelation and Mystery Revisited 44 Conclusion 46 APPENDIX I: ON THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF EDWARD SCHILLEBEECKX …................... 48 Schillebeeckx's Early Christology and Ecclesiology 48 Schillebeeckx's Later Christology and Ecclesiology 50 APPENDIX II: “APOLOGETIC” AFTERWORD …................................................................. 54 Bibliography …............................................................................................................................. 55 ii THE CONTINUING RELEVANCE OF KARL BARTH'S CRITIQUE OF LIBERAL THEOLOGY It is the contention of the author that all theology is both practical and incomplete. It is practical, in that it must be of service to the Universal Church and the faithful. It is incomplete in that it is always but a fragment—a small contribution to a long ongoing dialogue. The spirit of this work can be summed up in the words of Karl Barth: “The gospel is not a truth among other truths. Rather, it sets a question-mark against all truths.”1 In this fragment, I will begin with liberal Protestant theology and Barth, and I will end with the Church today, remembering that the Gospel of Christ holds a question-mark against this and all theological endeavors. The crisis facing the modern Church is undeniable. Many churches are dying. It is my conviction that the Church needs resurrection, not resuscitation. Introduction: Karl Barth and the Mainline Church Today The development of Karl Barth's theology – his disenchantment with liberalism and movement towards dogmatism, as well as the dialogue sparked by this development in the 20th century, speaks to the church of the 21st century. The Mainline Protestant denominations in the United States draw their theologies from the traditions established during the Reformation and strongly influenced by the liberal theological tendencies born out of the Enlightenment. The development of liberal theology after Barth has continued while holding him at arm's length. He is someone liberal theologians must wrestle with or go around; they ignore him at their own peril. 1 Barth, Epistle to the Romans. p. 35. 1 The work and historic context of Barth should be our cautionary tale. Here I will explore the influence of two great liberal theologians on Barth's early theology, and how German nationalism created in crisis in theology that led Barth to become a dialectical theologian. I will explore the dialogues that developed out of the “Barthian revolt,” in an effort to provide some insight into the shortcomings of liberalism and orthodoxy. I will argue that both liberal theology and Barth's dualistic theology must be transcended to be of relevance to the church today. Since my primary concern is the future of the church, I will conclude by offering the beginnings of an ecclesiology based on this work. Today's Mainline Protestant denominations in the United States have as their foundation the liberal theology born out of the European “Age of Reason.” The enlightenment movement in philosophy and the liberal movement in theology, from Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Schleiermacher onward represents a critically important development in Protestant theology. Martin Luther's doctrine of universal priesthood finds a deeper realization in Kant's enlightenment. The enlightenment signaled humankind's release from “self-incurred tutelage.” As Kant remarked: “Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding without direction of another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution and courage to use it without direction from another.”2 Kant argued that clergy have an obligation to make the sermon “conform to the symbol of the church he serves, for he has been accepted on this condition.” In contrast to the scholar who has “complete freedom, even the calling, to communicate to the public all his carefully tested and well-meaning thoughts on that which is erroneous in the symbol and to make suggestions for 2 Kant, p. 286. 2 the better organization of the religious body and church.”3 However, in the Mainline church today, both clergy and laity find the ability to function as a scholar, neither fully confined by the symbol of the church, nor completely abandoning that symbol. While the clergy have a responsibility to both their superiors and their congregation to uphold the traditions of the church, both doctrinal freedom and freedom of the pulpit have liberated them to some degree. The only practical restriction one finds in the pulpit is to speak on those things that will, in fact, “preach.” The liberation of the preacher comes at a cost. She is no longer bound by the Word of God, but by the context of her congregation. If she is faithful to the gospel, she will preach it faithfully while being mindful of her congregation's context and how they can best receive the message. She is also free (or—in some cases—may find herself pressured) to preach another gospel. She may draw her cues from what her congregation wishes to hear, rather than what they need to hear. She may be pulled to that which corrupts the gospel, such as prosperity theology. The danger of the present situation isn't evident only in the “bad theologies” that manifest in various churches of all denominations today. The cost of rationalizing away faith has created in the Mainline especially the tendency to make the Church solely about engaging the causes of social and economic justice. As important as that work is, it has reduced the church to its social function. These days it's not all that shocking there are ministers like the Rev. John Shuck of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), who claims the identity of both Christian and atheist.4 Sociologist of Religion Robert Bellah, in one of his final addresses before his death, argued that Liberal Protestantism has been eclipsed by its own success. Since the churches have 3 Ibid. p. 288. 4 Shuck, John. “I'm a Presbyterian Minister Who Doesn't Believe in God.” Friendly Atheist. http://www.pathos.com. Posted 17 March 2015. Web. Accessed 30 March 2015. 3 managed to infiltrate and transform secular society, they are in decline.5 Bellah writes: The “eclipse” [of liberal Protestantism] may be due to the triumph of liberal Protestantism. By so invading secular humanist culture that it lost its own distinction, it won, after all, by transforming secular humanist culture itself. There is more than a little evidence that most Americans, for example, would assent to unmarked liberal Protestant beliefs more often than to unmarked orthodox alternatives, and that this would be true not only for most mainline Protestants but also for most Catholics and even most Evangelicals.6 It is my contention that modern theological movement has, as a whole, attempted to subsume theology through philosophy of religion. This has caused many within the discipline to forget the humility and reverence in approaching the Divine. How often have we as theologians forgotten, in our zeal to pursue God and to love God with all our mind, that the totality of God is beyond our apprehension? Every theologian of merit acknowledges this limitation, yet in the moment we get caught up in the pietistic experience of doing theology, we find ourselves at risk of forgetting. We substitute the subject of our theology—God—for the form and content which points to that subject. “For now we see in a mirror, dimly…” (1 Cor. 13.12) Barth reminds us of this: The truth concerning the limiting and dissolving of men by the unknown God, which breaks forth in the resurrection, is a known truth: this is the tragic factor in the story of the passion of the truth. When our limitation is apprehended, and when He is perceived who, in bounding us, is also the dissolution of our limitation, the most primitive as well as the most highly developed forms of human self-consciousness become repeatedly involved in a 'despairing humiliation', in the 'irony of intelligence' (H. Cohen). We know that God is He whom we do not know, and that our ignorance is precisely the problem and the source of our knowledge.7 The task of theology calls us to meditate on the mystery of God, not in the hopes of unraveling it, but with the desire to serve God and to seek God and God's will for us. As we 5 Todd, Douglas. 6 Bellah, Robert N. 7 Barth, Epistle to the Romans. p. 45. Emphasis added. See also “The Word of God and the Task of Ministry” in The Word of God and the Word of Man. 4 engage this task, we must remember our own finitude, and that the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of the world (1 Cor. 1.25). In short, we must approach our task with proper humility. Modern Protestant Theology and the Early Barth Liberal theology, like most branches of theology, is not a monolithic entity, and to present it as such would be a disservice to its rich and diverse history.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Towards an African Inculturation Biblical Pneumatology: a Response to the Rise of Neo- Pentecostalism in Tanzanian Christianity Faith Lugazia Luther Seminary
    Luther Seminary Digital Commons @ Luther Seminary Doctor of Philosophy Theses Student Theses 2010 Towards an African Inculturation Biblical Pneumatology: A Response to the Rise of Neo- Pentecostalism in Tanzanian Christianity Faith Lugazia Luther Seminary Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.luthersem.edu/phd_theses Part of the Christianity Commons, History of Christianity Commons, and the New Religious Movements Commons Recommended Citation Lugazia, Faith, "Towards an African Inculturation Biblical Pneumatology: A Response to the Rise of Neo-Pentecostalism in Tanzanian Christianity" (2010). Doctor of Philosophy Theses. Paper 15. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses at Digital Commons @ Luther Seminary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctor of Philosophy Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Luther Seminary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TOWARDS AN AFRICAN INCULTURATION BIBLICAL PNEUMATOLOGY: A RESPONSE TO THE RISE OF NEO-PENTECOSTALISM IN TANZANIAN CHRISTIANITY by FAITH LUGAZIA A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Luther Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 2010 LUTHER SEMINARY LIBRARY 2375 Como Avenue 8 t P*ul, MN 65108-144? © 2010 by Faith Lugazia All rights reserved LUTHER SEMINARY ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA PH.D. THESIS Title of Thesis: Towards An African Inculturation of Biblical Pneumatology: A Response to the Rise of Neo-Pentecostalism in Tanzanian Christianity. Author: Faith Kokubelwa Lugazia Thesis committee: L . jA JL a- ABSTRACT Towards an African Inculturation Biblical Pneumatology: A Response to the Rise ofNeo- Pentecostalism in Tanzanian Christianity By Faith Lugazia In this dissertation, 1 seek to lay the groundwork for developing an African inculturation of biblical pneumatology relevant to the Tanzanian context.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodicy: an Overview
    1 Theodicy: An Overview Introduction All of us struggle at one time or another in life with why evil happens to someone, either ourselves, our family, our friends, our nation, or perhaps some particularly disturbing instance in the news—a child raped, a school shooting, genocide in another country, a terrorist bombing. The following material is meant to give an overview of the discussion of this issue as it takes place in several circles, especially that of the Christian church. I. The Problem of Evil Defined Three terms, "the problem of evil," "theodicy," and "defense" are important to our discussion. The first two are often used as synonyms, but strictly speaking the problem of evil is the larger issue of which theodicy is a subset because one can have a secular problem of evil. Evil is understood as a problem when we seek to explain why it exists (Unde malum?) and what its relationship is to the world as a whole. Indeed, something might be considered evil when it calls into question our basic trust in the order and structure of our world. Peter Berger in particular has argued that explanations of evil are necessary for social structures to stay themselves against chaotic forces. It follows, then, that such an explanation has an impact on the whole person. As David Blumenthal observes, a good theodicy is one that has three characteristics: 1. "[I]t should leave one with one’s sense of reality intact." (It tells the truth about reality.) 2. "[I]t should leave one empowered within the intellectual-moral system in which one lives." (Namely, it should not deny God’s basic power or goodness.) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • A Philosophical Audacity
    A Philosophical Audacity Barth’s Notion of Experience Between Neo-Kantianism and Nietzsche1 Anthony Feneuil [email protected] This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: “A Philosophical Audacity: Barth’s Notion of Experience Between Neo-Kantianism and Nietzsche“, which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijst.12077/full. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving Abstract: This article addresses Barth’s dialectical notion of experience in the 1920s. I argue that the theoretical problem raised by recent studies on Barth’s notion of experience after his break with liberalism (i.e., the apparent inconsistency between Barth’s move towards an increasingly neo-Kantian understanding of experience and his emphasis on the existential and psychological dimensions of experience) can be solved by the hypothesis of a Nietzschean influence on Barth's epistemology in the 1920s. I defend not only the historical plausibility but also the conceptual fecundity of such a hypothesis, which casts a new light on Barth’s relation to philosophy and the notion of experience, and lays the basis for a consistent Barthian theology of experience. *** Theology is not a discreet slice of knowledge you could simply add to one philosophy or other. It exists nowhere but through philosophy, and that is why Barth’s theological innovation cannot manifest itself apart from philosophical innovation. Barth is not a philosopher, and he does not explicitly develop his concepts in a philosophical way. But Barth repeatedly claims we cannot grant theology an extraordinary status among human discourses.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting the Theology of Barth in Light of Nietzsche's Dictum “God Is Dead”
    Interpreting the theology of Barth in light of Nietzsche’s dictum “God is dead” André J Groenewald Pastor: Presbyterian Church of Scotland Edinburgh, Scotland Abstract Karl Barth responded with his theology to Nietzsche’s dictum “God is dead” by stating that God is the living God. God does not need the human race to exist. God reveals God self to humankind whenever God wills. Barth agreed with Nietzsche that the god of the nineteenth century was a “Nicht-Gott”. The article aims to discus Karl Barth’s respons to Nietzsche’s impulse towards the development of a concept of God that would lead to neither atheism nor theism. The article argues that Barth paved the way for talking about God by defining God as the “communicative God”. 1. INTRODUCTION In his book, Die fröhliche Wissenschaft, originally written in 1882, Nietzsche tells about a mad man who runs around in a marketplace looking for “God” (Nietzsche 1973:159). Since he cannot find God, he can only reach one conclusion. God is dead! Nietzsche did not per se deny or affirm the existence of God. He announced the death of the god of modernity (Ward [1997] 1998:xxix; Groenewald 2005:146). He had a problem with the notion of “Fortschritt” according to which history has proven that human beings develop to greater heights of their own accord and that the potential for progress is intrinsic to humankind (Nietzsche 1969a:169; 1972: 304, 309, 310; see Jensen 2006:47, 51). “God’s existence and providence could then be proven on account of this optimistic progress in the course of history” (Groenewald 2005:146).
    [Show full text]
  • The Compatibility of an Existential Perspective with Religion
    CHAPTER 8 THE COMPATIBILITY OF AN EXISTENTIAL PERSPECTIVE WITH RELIGION “In discussions of Existentialism, this idea of the baselessness and arbitrariness of human values is almost always the one that arouses protest.” (Van Cleve Morris, 1990, Existentialism in Education, p. 41) Concerns raised in response to any perspective described as existential are usually based upon the apparent ‘arbitrariness’ of values as identified by Morris in the passage above. A perspective of existential spirituality might be assumed to be potentially at odds with religious views because it privi- leges the centring of the person rather than of a doctrinal framework and therefore it might be considered as being inappropriate for religious-based schools. The purpose of this chapter is to examine whether the perspective of existential spirituality being developed here can be compatible with religious views, and if so, how it must be conceptualised. If existential philosophy is unable to readily lend itself to an acceptance of a deity and is unable to be seen as being able to embrace religious views, then opposition towards the adoption of existential spirituality for education could fairly be raised, not least because many educational institutions in western societies are clearly affiliated with various religions, especially those of Christianity. Sartre’s views have often made Existentialism appear inherently atheistic. A well-known connotation imputed to the philosophy is its denial of the existence of a deity or even of his ‘death’ but who in turn might be otherwise able to provide meaning to the lives of individuals. Christian theologians such as Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Paul Tillich and Rudolf Bultmann, who have used existential philosophy as a basis for their interpretations, often tend to demythologise religion giving little notice to the deity as an aspect of their particular world-views.
    [Show full text]
  • Karl Barth's Understanding of Mission: the Church in Relationship
    Karl Barth’s understanding of mission: The Church in relationship1 W Bentley2 (University of Pretoria) ABSTRACT Karl Barth’s understanding of mission: The Church in relationship As the Church is moving towards its 21st century of existence, it is confronted by challenges it has never known before. This changing world demands self-reflection within the Church. It has to consider its place, identity and function, thereby giving rise to the exploration of its mission. In this article, the ecclesiology of Karl Barth is explored. By considering Barth’s understanding of the Church’s relationship with different parties such as God, other religions, those outside the Christian faith, the State and its own inner dynamics, the Church will be reminded of its missionary function in the world. 1 INTRODUCTION Is the Church’s missional function still valid in a world that is faced with ever increasing challenges? It seems that a world governed by modernist principles and challenged by post-modern philosophies, necessitates the need for the Church to think creatively about its mission. Barth’s description of the Church’s mission provides a good model that would facilitate such a process. This model focuses on the Church’s relationships and defines mission accordingly. Before discussing Barth’s definition of the Church as it exists in relationship with the different entities, attention needs to be given to Barth’s description of the mission of the Church as found in Church Dogmatics. 2 THE MISSION AND FUNCTION OF THE CHURCH Barth starts by defining the Mission and Function of the Church in Church Dogmatics Volume 1 (Barth 1956a:743-884) by describing 1 This article is based on research done for a PhD degree in the Department of Dogmatics and Christian Ethics of the Faculty of Theology at the University of Pretoria.
    [Show full text]
  • The Epistemological Development of Karl Barth
    Af)oria Vol. 10 number 1,2000 The Epistemological Development of Karl Barth SAMUEL NEWLANDS Karl Earth's early theological epistemology, often expressed in terms of a negative dialectic or man's acknowledgement of being known, is characteristically founded upon a firm distinction between God and man, wherein the former is qualitatively different and wholly other than the latter. This distinction lies at the foundation of Earth's early dialectical theology and is frequently expressed throughout his commentary on Romans, as well as Church Dogmatics. For the early Earth, the extent of man's knowledge ofGod is aptly summarized in his opening remarks of The Epistle to the Romans: We know that God is He whom we do not know,and that our ignorance is precisely the problem and source of our knowledge. We know that God is the Personality which we are not...The recognition of the absolute heteronomy under which we stand is itself an autonomous recognition; and this is precisely that which may be known of God. (Epistle 45) It is somewhat surprising to find the same theologian, less than a decade later in 1936, claiming that "to know Jesus Christ is to know God, the one and only God, majestic and personal, the Creator and Lord of the world and man"(Knowledge 71). This later epistemological claim appears to lack the emphasis on the difference between God and man and even goes so far as to predicate positive properties of God. Sam Newlands is a senior philosophy student at Wake Forest University. In the fall, he will continue his philosophical studies by pursuing a doctorate in the philosophy of religion at Yale University.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil As a Moral Objection to Theism
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Birmingham Research Archive, E-theses Repository THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AS A MORAL OBJECTION TO THEISM by TOBY GEORGE BETENSON A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. Department of Philosophy School of Philosophy, Theology and Religion College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham September 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. Abstract: I argue that the problem of evil can be a moral objection to theistic belief. The thesis has three broad sections, each establishing an element in this argument. Section one establishes the logically binding nature of the problem of evil: The problem of evil must be solved, if you are to believe in God. And yet, I borrow from J. L. Mackie’s criticisms of the moral argument for the existence of God, and argue that the fundamentally evaluative nature of the premises within the problem of evil entails that it cannot be used to argue for the non- existence of God.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prosperity Gospel of Coronavirus Response Paul A. Djupe, Denison
    The Prosperity Gospel of Coronavirus Response Paul A. Djupe, Denison University Ryan P. Burge, Eastern Illinois University Abstract The sweep of the coronavirus pandemic across the world and United States offers an almost unparalleled opportunity to study how social systems cope with the threat and opportunities for collective action. In this paper we draw on survey data collected as the US flailed in response and before a general consensus among executive office-holders developed in the following weeks. In particular, we assess how holding prosperity gospel views strongly shaped perceptions of the virus and state responses to the virus. Research on the prosperity gospel is slowly expanding, and this paper helps to highlight some missing dimensions. At a time when concerted action for the social good could be uniting the country, prosperity gospel beliefs systematically undermine that possibility by augmenting threat, raising outgroup anxiety, and decreasing social trust. [129 words] Paper Submitted to ​Politics & Religion​ April 16, 2020 [6255 total words] “​Satan and a virus will not stop us” –Rev. Tony Spell (qtd. in Seipel 2020) At the time of writing, the coronavirus is sweeping the world with over one million cases and tens of thousands dead; the United States tops both counts. In the face of the pandemic, some congregations are still meeting in person (or think they should be) with an apparent devil-may-care attitude. In this paper, we ask what drives reactions to the coronavirus, with a focus on one rapidly growing religious belief system – the Prosperity Gospel. This belief system is particularly well tuned to trigger a strong reaction to the societal response to the spread of the coronavirus.
    [Show full text]
  • Amos Yong Complete Curriculum Vitae
    Y o n g C V | 1 AMOS YONG COMPLETE CURRICULUM VITAE Table of Contents PERSONAL & PROFESSIONAL DATA ..................................................................................... 2 Education ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Academic & Administrative Positions & Other Employment .................................................................... 3 Visiting Professorships & Fellowships ....................................................................................................... 3 Memberships & Certifications ................................................................................................................... 3 PUBLICATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 4 Monographs/Books – and Reviews Thereof.............................................................................................. 4 Edited Volumes – and Reviews Thereof .................................................................................................. 11 Co-edited Book Series .............................................................................................................................. 16 Missiological Engagements: Church, Theology and Culture in Global Contexts (IVP Academic) – with Scott W. Sunquist and John R. Franke ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Liberation and Prosperity Theologies Geoffrey Grogan, Glasgow
    LIBERATION AND PROSPERITY THEOLOGIES GEOFFREY GROGAN, GLASGOW Introduction The title of this paper may seem strange. On the face of it, Liberation Theology and Prosperity Theology may seem to have little in common, even to be diametrically opposed to each other. A little thought, however, will enable us to see that the very fact of their stark contrast makes them suitable subjects for joint treatment. It is only where two entities have something in common that we may helpfully contrast them. If I were to be asked to contrast the Forth Bridge and three o'clock I would find the task difficult, if not impossible, for they have so little in common. Experience shows that often opposites have a meeting point. In practice, Fascist and Marxist totalitarianism may be equally unpleasant to live under. The effects of cold and heat on the body have some similarities. Because both subjects are large, and each type of theology has a number of varieties and off-shoots, I propose to limit the scope of the paper. We will concentrate on the central objective features of each of the two theologies. For example, we will say more about Prosperity Theology's concept of God's purpose than its understanding of faith. We will consider first the nature of each type of theology, and then seek their theological and philosophical connections. We will then endeavour to provide a biblical critique, first of all looking at elements the two have in common and then treating each separately. Finally we will indicate our conclusions on the basis of this study.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problematic of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace for Contemporary Theology D
    Journal for Christian Theological Research Volume 5 Article 2 2000 Nature Dis-Graced and Grace De-Natured: The Problematic of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace for Contemporary Theology D. Lyle Dabney Marquette University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.luthersem.edu/jctr Part of the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Dabney, D. Lyle (2000) "Nature Dis-Graced and Grace De-Natured: The rP oblematic of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace for Contemporary Theology," Journal for Christian Theological Research: Vol. 5 , Article 2. Available at: http://digitalcommons.luthersem.edu/jctr/vol5/iss2000/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Luther Seminary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal for Christian Theological Research by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Luther Seminary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 12/18/2017 Nature Dis-Graced and Grace De-Natured: The Problematic of the Augustinian Doctrie of Grace for Contemporary Theology D. Lyle Dabney, "Nature Dis­Graced and Grace De­Natured: The Problematic of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace for Contemporary Theology," Journal for Christian Theological Research [http://apu.edu/~CTRF/articles/2000_articles/dabney.html] 5:3 (2000). Nature Dis­Graced and Grace De­Natured: The Problematic of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace for Contemporary Theology D. Lyle Dabney Marquette University , Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1. "Contemporary theology" Kilian McDonnell writes, "has turned from a theology of the Word to a theology of the world".(1) That statement, it seems to me, neatly sums up the current situation in theology.
    [Show full text]