This Electronic Thesis Or Dissertation Has Been Downloaded from the King’S Research Portal At
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ The use and function of mystery within contemporary systematic theology with special reference to the doctrine of providence in Karl Barth and Maurice Wiles Griffin, Nicholas Philip Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 28. Sep. 2021 The use and function of mystery within contemporary systematic theology with special reference to the doctrine of providence in Karl Barth and Maurice Wiles. Rev. Nicholas Philip Griffin 1333830 For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology and Religious Studies Word Count: 95,189 1 Abstract The contention of this thesis is that God is fundamentally mysterious and that this is displayed clearly through the doctrine of providence. The implication of this thesis is that mystery is an inescapable feature of Christian theology. This will be demonstrated through the following sections. Firstly, by contrasting three contemporary attempts to survey mystery, I will suggest a basic division between 'comprehensible' and 'inscrutable' mysteries. Inscrutable mysteries (subdivided into 'ontological and 'epistemological') will form the primary type of mystery to be explored throughout the research. Secondly, applying the refined sense of mystery, I will construct a dialogue between Karl Barth and Maurice Wiles to explore their different uses of mystery within their respective doctrines of providence. Both theologians have written extensively about providence and use ‘mystery’ throughout their work. I have selected providence as a doctrinal focus because it is one of the pre-eminent places in theology, in which we might expect God to be most accessible and yet we find the clouds of unknowing most impenetrable. Within and outside of their formulations of providence, both Barth and Wiles frequently employ mystery in differing and interesting ways and this dialogue will illustrate their differing theological backgrounds and the possibilities for constructive uses of mystery in theology. Building on the earlier sections the final chapter makes constructive formal and substantive proposals. The methodological portion advances mystery as neither 'another starting point' or the disappointing end to a failed theology but a basic mode and style of theological construction. The substantive portion proposes the use of mystery as a defence against idolatry with implications for contextual theologies. This research will be within systematic theology and methods will include critical theological and philosophical analysis. I believe that this thesis makes three distinctive and original contributions to theological knowledge. Firstly, there have been very few attempts to 'map' types of mystery in this extensive way and this thesis provides stable terminology for the theological task. Secondly, I know of no constructed dialogue between Barth and Wiles. 2 Thirdly, mystery is a ubiquitous and underdeveloped theme of theology that is placed at the beginning of this thesis rather than the end. 3 Acknowledgements This thesis would not exist without the kind support of multiple funding bodies including St Luke’s Theological Trust, Sarum St Michael Educational Charity, Kings College Theological Trust, The Foundation of St Matthias and lastly Plymouth Marjon University. This thesis has been written alongside full time ministerial work and I owe much to the vision and permission of the Diocese of Bath and Wells, in particular Rev. Dr. Catherine Wright and Rev. Graham Owen for their advocacy and support in the early stages of this project. Special thanks must be extended to my original supervisor Professor Oliver Davies and to his replacement Dr. Edward Epsen III for his support during my final year. Thanks also to Mrs Rosemary Sheppy for her kind and judicious proof reading. Deepest thanks to The Rev Professor Vernon White for his encouragement, intellectual generosity, kindness and modelling of academic priesthood. Great love and thanks to my children, Henry and Felicity who were tiny at the beginning of this thesis and are now nearly grown. Finally, to my wife, Bryony for her unending goodness, referencing support and patience from first to last. 4 Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter One .......................................................................................................................................... 10 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 10 1.1 Mystery as the failure of theology .............................................................................................. 11 1.2 Mystery as priestly manipulation ............................................................................................... 13 1.3 The thesis amidst objections....................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Justification of the question........................................................................................................ 15 2.2 Personal rationale ....................................................................................................................... 18 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 18 3.1 Hermeneutical Justification of Barth/Wiles Dialogue ................................................................. 23 4. Typologies of mystery ................................................................................................................... 26 4.1 Bernard Verkamp ‘Senses of Mystery’ ........................................................................................ 28 4.1.1 ‘Denial of mystery’ ................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.2 The Aesthetic Sense of Mystery ............................................................................................... 29 4.1.3 The Skeptical Sense of Mystery ............................................................................................... 30 4.1.4 Sacral Sense of Mystery ........................................................................................................... 31 4.1.5 The Immanentist Sense of Mystery ......................................................................................... 31 4.1.6 The Transcendent sense of Mystery ........................................................................................ 32 4.1.7 Reflections on Verkamp’s typology ......................................................................................... 33 4.2. Steven Boyer and Christopher Hall, ‘The Mystery of God’ ........................................................ 34 4.2.1 Mystery as an ‘investigative mystery’ ...................................................................................... 35 4.2.2 ‘Revelational Mystery’ ............................................................................................................. 35 4.2.3 Extensive Mystery .................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.4 Facultative Mystery .................................................................................................................. 36 4.2.5 Dimensional Mystery ............................................................................................................... 37 4.2.6 Reflections on Boyer and Hall’s typology ................................................................................ 38 4.3 William Wainwright – ‘Mystery’ ................................................................................................. 38 4.3.1 The unexpected mystery.......................................................................................................... 38 4.3.2 Incongruent with ‘common notions’ ......................................................................................