THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA The Threefold Contribution of Gerald O’Collins’s Fundamental Theology: Its Christocentric Outlook, Its Focus on the Resurrection And Its Groundwork for Ecumenism A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By David B. Glasow Washington D.C. 2015 The Threefold Contribution of Gerald O’Collins’s Fundamental Theology: Its Christocentric Outlook, Its Focus on the Resurrection And Its Groundwork for Ecumenism David B. Glasow, Ph.D. Director: William Loewe, Ph.D. This dissertation examines the contributions of Gerald O’Collins S. J. to fundamental theology over the past fifty years, focusing on three interconnected areas of insight: the relationship of history to revelation, the centrality of Christ, and ecumenism and inter- religious dialogue, noting their development over time in his theology. It provides a critical examination of O’Collins’s contributions to the field of fundamental theology— especially his insights into revelation and history, his focused Christocentrism, and his understanding of the relationship between Christianity and non-Christian religions. These interconnected themes form the core of his thought in fundamental theology and draw together important insights from various fields of interest, such as Christology, ecumenism, and Christian anthropology. This dissertation will show how O’Collins’s view of revelation and history informs his Christocentric perspective. Within his Christocentric perspective the resurrection plays a decisive role and opens several possibilities for the ongoing presence of Christ both in time and to all peoples, thus setting the groundwork for O’Collins’s ideas concerning faith and inter-religious dialogue and understanding. This dissertation by David B. Glasow fulfills the dissertation requirement for the doctoral degree in Systematic Theology approved by William Loewe, Ph.D., as Director, and by Michael Root, Pd.D., and John Galvin, Dr. Theol. as Readers. ____________________________ William Loewe, Ph.D., Director ____________________________ Michael Root, Ph.D., Reader ____________________________ John Galvin, Dr. Theol., Reader ii CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 History and Nature of Fundamental Theology ……………………………….1 1.2 Origins and Pre-Second Vatican Council Characteristics of Fundamental Theology …………………………………………………………...…….5 1.3 Fundamental Theology following the Second Vatican Council ……..……...12 1.4 The Fundamental Theology of Van Noort and Latourelle …………..………17 1.5 Gerald O’Collins and His Understanding of Fundamental Theology …..…..30 1.6 Method and Purpose of this Present Study …………………………..……...35 Chapter 2: The Relationship of Revelation to History 2.0 Introduction ……………………………….………...……………..………...38 2.1 O’Collins’s Personalist Understanding of Revelation ……………..………..45 2.2 Stages of Revelation ………………………………………….……………..54 2.3 The Historical Nature of Revelation …..……………………….…................57 2.4 Salvation History ……………………………………………………………64 2.5 The Relationship between Faith and History …………………..……………74 2.6 Factors that Mediate Faith ………….……………………….………………83 2.7 Summary ……………………………………………………..…..................94 2.8 Preliminary Critique……..…………………………………….……………..98 Chapter 3: Christocentrism and the Resurrection 3.0 Introduction ……………………………………...…………….......……….106 3.1 Christocentric Nature of Faith and Revelation …...……………..................109 3.2 The Centrality of the Resurrection for Belief…...…………….....................115 3.3 Resurrection and History …………………………...……………..……….119 3.4 Christ’s Ongoing Risen Presence …………...……….….……………….. ..129 3.5 The Experiential Correlate …………………………...………….................139 3.6 Summary.………………...………………………...…………….................145 3.7 Preliminary Critique ………………………………………………..………149 Chapter 4: Inter-Religious Dialogue 4.0 Introduction …….…………………………...……….…...….......................152 4.1 Christocentric and Universal Salvation through the Risen Christ ................157 4.2 Experiencing Christ in General History………………………………….....160 4.3 Seeds of the Word …………………..……………………….…..................164 4.4 The Unique Role of the Jewish People…. ………………….…...................173 iii 4.5 The Role of Tradition in Ecumenism ……...……………….........................178 4.6 Summary …..……………………...……………..........................................184 4.7 Preliminary Critique ..……………………………………………………....186 Chapter 5 Critical Evaluation 5.0 Introduction …………………………………………….…………………..189 5.1 Comparison of van Noort, Latourelle and O’Collins ………….…...............189 5.2 General Critique………………………….…………………………………192 5.3 Critical Evaluation..………………..……………………………………….199 5.4 Future Areas of Development ……………………………………………...207 Appendix A: Brief Identifications of Significant Thinkers Referred to in the Text ……………………………………………………..…..208 Selected Bibliography ….……………………………………………..………………..212 iv Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 History and Nature of Fundamental Theology Fundamental theology is a specialized branch of theology that studies foundational issues surrounding the sources of theology, such as revelation and the conditions that open human beings to God’s self-communication.1 This definition of the field generally holds true for many theologians in the field, though there exists a diversity of approaches as well as a “real uncertainty” regarding its purpose and method.2 Regardless of the current variety of approaches, it is clear that fundamental theology following the Second Vatican Council can be contrasted with its earlier apologetic roots in the nineteenth century. Originally, the basic task of apologetic theology, also known as “apologetics,” was to find reasons for judging the authenticity of what claims to be God’s word.3 René Latourelle notes in his Dictionary of Fundamental Theology that today the field of fundamental theology retains some aspects of its roots in apologetic theology, but also manifests significant discontinuity. These differences between post-Second Vatican Council fundamental theology and earlier apologetic theology are so significant that Latourelle characterizes fundamental theology as having “a new status, a new identity [and] a new set of papers” in comparison with its apologetic roots.4 The genesis of fundamental theology was triggered by a growing awareness of the inadequacies in nineteenth-century apologetics. While the term “apologetics” or “apologetic theology” may bear some negative connotations today, its original aim—to explain and defend 1 Gerald O’Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (New York: Paulist Press, 1991), 82. 2 Jean-Pierre Torrell, “New Trends in Fundamental Theology,” Problems and Perspectives of Fundamental Theology, eds. René Latourelle and Gerald O’Collins (New York: Paulist Press, 1982), 14. 3 Avery Dulles, “The Rebirth of Apologetics,” First Things, May 2004, http://www.firstthings.com/article/2008/08/the-rebirth-of-apologetics [accessed November 12, 2013]. 4 Dictionary of Fundamental Theology, eds. René Latourelle and Rino Fisichella (New York: Crossroads, 1994), xiii. 1 2 the faith—was an important one.5 The apologetic endeavor has been part of the fabric of theology since the earliest days of the Church, in such writers as Justin Martyr and Origen, and has continued throughout the Church’s history.6 But in the nineteenth century, theology as a whole was faced with new challenges and perspectives posed by Enlightenment thought. This gave rise to a specific form of apologetic theology which served as a prologue to dogmatic theology. The response taken by apologetic theology to these challenges unfortunately led to certain imbalances in its presuppositions and methods, which in essence used the very rationalistic assumptions it sought to counter. The field of fundamental theology grew out of various attempts to correct the imbalances found in apologetic theology. Initially fundamental theology included the difficulties found in apologetic theology as it originally strove to establish with rationalistic certainty the truths and sources of the Christian faith7 in much the same way as apologetics had done. Following this initial stage of development fundamental theology became more self-aware of these problems and has since distanced itself from such proofs and instead has widened its scope beyond the limited concerns and methods of apologetics. As mentioned above, fundamental theology, in broadening the scope of its investigations beyond that of its apologetic predecessor, defies a precise definition today though the field can be contrasted with apologetics as a distinct discipline. Certain common themes in all its varieties can also be identified. Fundamental theology today, unlike its predecessor, grapples with issues such as pluralism in contemporary society, the growing indifference towards Christianity in the 5 Avery Dulles, A History of Apologetics (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999), xix. 6 Ibid., 27-89. 7 See René Latourelle, “Fundamental Theology” in Latourelle and Fisichella, Dictionary of Fundamental Theology, 324–332. 3 larger culture, and the impact of science on contemporary thinking. In addition the tone of fundamental theology has turned from confrontation to dialogue with non-adherents.8 While today’s fundamental theologians share a common concern with avoiding the imbalances of the past and engaging in a theology that includes an openness