Approaches of Theology
(Excerpted from The Creator: A Textbook in Theological Anthropology by Eduardo P. Hontiveros, S.J., Loyola School of Theology Textbook Series, Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City, pp. 7-11, 1988.)
Theology is “faith seeking understanding” in a systematic and orderly way. Theology is the science of faith. It is the conscious and methodical explanation and explication of the divine revelation received and grasped in faith. Theology should strive for a clearer understanding, deeper appreciation, and more effective application of the truths revealed by God in Christ. We present here four approaches in seeking to understand the faith particularly our belief in ‘God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth’ (Apostles’ Creed). The first three are proposed by Gustavo Gutierrez’ book A Theology of Liberation, pp. 4-15.
1. Theology as Wisdom A meditation on the Word of God, especially on the Bible, geared towards spiritual growth. The Fathers of the Church are our prime example of this approach. A good modern example of this “Theology of Wisdom” is Langdon Gilkey’s study of the relevance of “Creation” to the Good News of salvation (GILKEY, Maker of Heaven and Earth, pp. 4-7). Gilkey suggests that the fundamental question in the Theology of Creation is: Who is God in whom we put our trust? The importance and meaning of other assertions depend on the belief that he who saves and judges is the creator who has brought us and all else into being; and that men exist in a natural and historical environment which, while needing redemption, has the potentiality of such transformation because it is subject to God. Thus we are rescued from the bewildering experience of our own creature-hood and from our helplessness in the face of all creation: we are not helpless, because God our Father is the master of all creation. 2. Theology as Rational Knowledge An intellectual discipline born of the meeting of faith and reason. Its immediate objective is the intellectual understanding of the doctrines of our faith. Scholastic Theology is our prime example of this approach. The intellectual study of the doctrines of our faith brings to light many paradoxes. E.g. God’s universal causality and the creatures’ real efficacy; man’s dependence on God (and his need for prayer) and his responsibility for developing the world and for bringing about justice in the world; God’s infinite transcendence and His intimate involvement in our world (e.g. through the Incarnation). And the study of these paradoxes leads to a deeper insight and appreciation of the salvation that comes from God, and to a more accurate synthesis of theology. 3. Theology as Critical Reflection Gustavo Gutierrez (in A Theology of Liberation, pp. 3-15) proposes that today theology must exercise, above all, the task of critical reflection. Critical reflection not only on man himself, and on his own basic principles, but also on the economic and socio-cultural issues in the life and reflection of the Christian community; a criticism of society and of the Church insofar as they are called and addressed by the World of God; a reflection on the Christian community’s profession of “a faith which works through charity.” The life, preaching, and historical commitment of the Church is a privileged locus theologicus. Critical reflection should offset an ideology which rationalizes and justifies a given social and ecclesial order (based on capitalism). On the other hand, pointing to the sources of revelation, this theology helps orient pastoral activity; it puts it in a wider context and helps it to avoid activism and immediatism. It fulfills a prophetic role by revealing the profound meaning of historical events, in order to make the Christians’ commitment within them more radical and clear. Another attempt at Theology as Critical Reflection is Karl Rahner’s reflection on man’s life-task in the world. (cf. his “Christianity and the new earth,” in Theology Digest 15 (1967) 275-282). According to Rahner, the world and human secular activity will be taken up into the new heaven and the new earth at the parousia. The Christian then must be committed to the development of the secular world. Gaudium et Spes is a concrete exposition of this commitment to the world. 4. Theology as Indigenization Theology can also start from, address and answer the felt needs and problems arising from the people’s culture and attitudes. The immediate objective of this approach is the incarnation of our faith and theology in the different cultures of the world. Pope Paul VI (Evangelii Nuntiandi, no. 63) explains this inculturation of theology: “The individual Churches, intimately built up not only of people but also of aspirations, of riches and limitations, of ways of praying, of loving, of looking at life and the world which distinguish this or that human gathering, have the task of assimilating the essence of the Gospel message and of transposing it, without the slightest betrayal of its essential truth, into the language that these particular people understand, then of proclaiming it in this language … in the field of liturgical expression, and in the areas of catechesis, theological formulation, secondary ecclesial structures, and ministries. And the word “language” should be understood here less in the semantic or literary sense than in the sense which one may call anthropological and cultural. “The question is undoubtedly a delicate one. Evangelization loses much of its force and effectiveness if it does not take into consideration the actual people to whom it is addressed, if it does not use their language, their signs and symbols, if it does not answer the questions they ask, and if it does not have an impact on their concrete life. But on the other hand evangelization risks losing its power and disappearing altogether if one empties or adulterates its content under the pretext of translating it … “Legitimate attention to individual churches cannot fail to enrich the Church. Such attention is indispensable and urgent. It responds to the very deep aspiration of people and human communities to find their own identity ever more clearly.” (Italics supplied). The Approach to undertake The approach will be eclectic, drawing from the four forms of theology cited above. It will have a practically pastoral objective: Whatever will help to meet the theological needs of the Filipino students. 1. Theology as Wisdom Gilkey is correct: trust in God in the face of a seemingly oppressive creation has validity in our rapidly changing world. Hence, we must retain an interest in the doctrine of God’s efficacy as Lord of Creation, and what this really means for our attitudes and actions. 2. Theology as Rational Knowledge Theological speculation about the paradoxes mentioned above (under Theology as Rational Knowledge) is needed to help the students steer a Christian way between superstitious credulity and unbelieving secularism. 3. Theology as Critical Reflection Rahner’s point concerning the Christian’s commitment to the development of the secular world (especially the development of man as “spirit-in-the-world”) is important for today’s Christians, who are called to witness to justice in a Christian way. Gutierrez points to the same commitment, but especially commitment to the process of Liberation in Third World countries. Therefore, we should pay special attention to this historically urgent priority in the tasks of Christians in the Philippines, without losing sight of the more total Christian commitment to full human dignity. 4. Theology as Indigenization Pope Paul VI points more specifically to the need of meeting the people where they are. The study of theology should start with a reflection on the actual Christian faith of the people. Theology: A Critical Reflection[1] Theological reflection – that is, the understanding of the faith – arises spontaneously and inevitably in the believer, in all those who have accepted the gift of the Word of God. Theology is intrinsic to a life of faith seeking to be authentic and complete and is, therefore, essential to the common consideration of this faith in the ecclesial community. There is present in all believers – and more so in every Christian community – a rough outline of a theology. There is present an effort to understand the faith, something like a pre-understanding of that faith which is manifested in life, action, and concrete attitude. It is on this foundation, and only because of it, that the edifice of theology – in the precise and technical sense of the term – can be erected. This foundation is not merely a jumping-off point, but the soil into which theological reflection stubbornly and permanently sinks its roots and from which it derives its strength.[2] But the focus of theological work, in the first sense of the term, has undergone many transformations throughout the history of the Church. “Bound to the role of the Church, theology is dependent upon its historical development,” writes Christian Duquoc.[3] Moreover, as Congar observed recently, this evolution has accelerated to a certain extent in recent years: “The theological work has changed in the past twenty-five years.” The Classical Tasks of Theology Theological study has fulfilled different functions throughout the history of the Christian community, but this does not necessarily mean that any of these different approaches has today been definitively superseded. Although expressed in different ways, the essential effort to understand the faith has remained. Moreover, the more penetrating and serious efforts have yielded decisive gains, opening paths along which all subsequent theological reflection must travel. In this perspective it is more accurate to speak of permanent tasks – although they have emerged at different moments in the history of the Church – than of historically successive stages of theology. Two of these functions are considered classical: theology as wisdom and theology as rational knowledge. Theology as Wisdom In the early centuries of the Church, what we now term theology was closely linked to the spiritual life.[4] It was essentially a meditation on the Bible, geared toward spiritual growth. Distinctions were made between the “beginners,” the faithful, and the “advanced,” who sought perfection. This theology was above all monastic and therefore characterized by a spiritual life removed from worldly concerns; it offered a model for every Christian desirous of advancing along the narrow path of sanctity and seeking a life of spiritual perfection. Anxious to dialogue with the thought of its time, this theology use Platonic and Neoplatonic categories. In these philosophies it found a metaphysics which stressed the existence of a higher world and the transcendence of an Absolute from which everything came and to which everything returned. The present life, on the other hand, was regarded as essentially contingent and was not valued sufficiently. It is important to remember, however, that at this same time the reflections of the Greek Fathers on the theology of the world – cosmos and history – go well beyond a mere personal spiritual meditation and place theology in a wider and more fruitful context. Around the fourteenth century, a rift appears between theologians and masters of the spiritual life. This division can be seen, for example, in such books as The Imitation of Christ, which has made a deep impact upon Christian spirituality during past centuries. We are suffering from this dichotomy even today, although it is true that Biblical renewal and the need to reflect upon lay spirituality are providing us with the broad outlines of what might be considered a new spiritual theology. The spiritual function of theology, so important in the early centuries and later regarded as parenthetical, constitutes, nevertheless, a permanent dimension of theology. Theology as Rational Knowledge From the twelfth century on, theology begins to establish itself as a science: “The transition has been made from sacra pagina to theologia in the modern sense which Abelard … was the first to use.” The process culminated with Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas. On the basis of Aristotelian categories, theology was classified as a “subaltern science.” St. Thomas’s view, nevertheless, was broad and synthetical: theology is not only a science, but also wisdom flowing from the charity which unites man to God. But this balance is lost when the abovementioned separation appears between theology and spirituality in the fourteenth century. The Thomistic idea of science is unclear today because it does not correspond to the definition generally accepted by the modern mind. But the essential feature of St. Thomas Aquinas’s work is that theology is an intellectual discipline, born of the meeting of faith and reason. From this point of view, therefore, it is more accurate to regard the theological task not as a science, but as rational knowledge. The function of theology as rational knowledge is also permanent – insofar as it is meeting between faith and reason, not exclusively between and any one philosophy, nor even between faith and philosophy in general. Reason has, especially today, many other manifestations than philosophical ones. The understanding of the faith is also following along new paths in our day; the social, psychological, and biological sciences. The social sciences, for example, are extremely important for theological reflection in Latin America. Theological thought not characterized by such a rationality and disinterestedness would not be truly faithful to an understanding of the faith. But it is well to remember, especially with respect to the outdated views which still persist in some quarters that in Scholastic theology after the thirteenth century there is a degradation of the Thomistic concept of theology. There arises at that time, regardless of outward appearances, a very different way of approaching the theological task. The demands of rational knowledge will be reduced to the need for systematization and clear exposition.[5] Scholastic theology will thus gradually become, especially after the Council of Trent, an ancillary discipline of the magisterium of the Church. Its function will be “(1) to define, present, and explain revealed truths; (2) to examine doctrine, to denounce and condemn false doctrines, and to defend true ones; (3) to teach revealed truths authoritatively.”[6] In summary, theology is of necessity both spirituality and rational knowledge. These are permanent and indispensable functions of all theological thinking. However, both functions must be salvaged, at least partially, from the division and deformations they have suffered throughout history. A reflective outlook and style especially must be retained, rather than one or another specific achievement gained in a historical context different from ours. Theology as Critical Reflection on Praxis The function of theology as critical reflection on praxis has gradually become more clearly defined in recent years, but it has its roots in the first centuries of the Church’s life. The Augustinian theology of history which we find in The City of God, for example, is based on a true analysis of the signs of the times and the demands with which they challenge the Christian community. Historical Praxis For various reasons the existential and active aspects of the Christian life have recently been stressed in a different way than in the immediate past. In the first place, charity has been fruitfully rediscovered as the center of the Christian life. This has led to a more Biblical view of the faith as an act of trust, a going out of one’s self, a commitment to God and neighbor, a relationship with others. It is in this sense that St. Paul tells us that faith works through charity: love is the nourishment and the fullness of faith, the gift of one’s self to the Other, and invariably to others. This is the foundation of the praxis of the Christian, of his active presence in history. According to the Bible, faith is the total response of man to God, who saves through love. In this light, the understanding of the faith appears as the understanding not of the simple affirmation – almost memorization – of truths, but of a commitment, an overall attitude, a particular posture toward life. In a parallel development, Christian spirituality has seen a significant evolution. In the early centuries of the Church there emerged the primacy, almost exclusiveness, of a certain kind of contemplative life, hermetical, monastic, characterized by withdrawal from the world, and presented as the model way to sanctity. About the twelfth century the possibility of sharing contemplation by means of preaching and other forms of apostolic activity began to be considered. This point of view was exemplified in the mixed life (contemplative and active) of the mendicant orders and was expressed in the formula: contemplata aliis tradere (“to transmit to others the fruits of contemplation”). Viewed historically this stage can be considered as a transition to Ignatian Spirituality, which sought a difficult but fruitful synthesis between contemplation and action: in actione contemplativus (“contemplative in action”). This process, strengthened in recent years by the search for a spirituality of the laity, culminates today in the studies on the religious value of the profane and in the spirituality of the activity of the Christian in the world. Moreover, today there is a greater sensitivity to the anthropological aspects of revelation.[7] The Word about God is at the same time a promise to the world. In revealing God to us, the Gospel message reveals us to ourselves in our situation before the Lord and with other men. The God of Christian revelation is a God made man, hence the famous comment of Karl Barth regarding Christian anthropocentrism: “Man is the measure of all things, since God became man.” All this has caused the revaluation of the presence and the activity of man in the world, especially in relation to other men. On this subject Congar writes: “Seen as a whole, the direction of theological thinking has been characterized by a transference away from attention to the being per se of supernatural realities, and toward attention to their relationship with man, with the world, and with the problems and the affirmations of all those who for us represent the Others.” There is no horizontalism in this approach. It is simply a question of the rediscovery of the indissoluble unity of man and God. On the other hand, the very life of the Church appears ever more clearly as a locus theologicus. Regarding the participation of Christians in the important social movements of their time, Chenu wrote insightfully more than thirty years ago: “They are active loci theologici for the doctrines of grace, the Incarnation, and the redemption, as expressly promulgated and described in detail by the papal encyclicals. They are poor theologians who, wrapped up in their manuscripts and scholastic disputations, are not open to these amazing events, not only in the pious fervor of their hearts but formally in their science; there is a theological datum and an extremely fruitful one, in the presence of the Spirit.” The so-called “new theology” attempted to adopt this posture some decades ago. The fact that the life of the Church is a source for all theological analysis has been recalled to mind often since then. The Word of God gathers and is incarnated in the community of faith, which gives itself to the service of all men. Vatican Council II has strongly reaffirmed the idea of a Church of service and not of power. This is a Church which is not centered upon itself and which does not “find itself” except when it “loses itself,” when it lives “the joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of men of this age” (Gaudium et spes, no. 1). All of these trends provide a new focus for seeing the presence and activity of the Church in the world as a starting point for theological reflection. What since John XXIII and Vatican Council II began to be called a theology of the signs of the times can be characterized along the same lines, although this takes a step beyond narrow ecclesial limits. It must not be forgotten that the signs of the times are not only a call to intellectual analysis. They are above all a call to pastoral activity, to commitment, and to service. Studying the signs of the times includes both dimensions. Therefore, Gaudium et Spes, no. 44, points out that discerning the signs of the times is the responsibility of every Christian, especially pastors and theologians, to hear, distinguish, and interpret the many voices of our age, and to judge them in the light of the divine Word. In this way, revealed truths can always be more deeply penetrated, better understood, and set forth to greater advantage.” Attributing this role to every member of the People of God and singling out the pastors – charged with guiding the activity of the Church – highlights the call to commitment which the signs of the times imply. Necessarily connected with this consideration, the function of theologians will be to afford greater clarity regarding this commitment by means of intellectual analysis. (It is interesting to note that the inclusion of theologians in the above-mentioned text met opposition during the conciliar debates.) Another factor, this time of a philosophical nature, reinforces the importance of human action as the point of departure for all reflection. The philosophical issues of our times are characterized by new relationships of man with nature, born of advances in science and technology. These new bonds affect the awareness man has of himself and of his active relationships with others. Maurice Blondel, moving away from an empty and fruitless spirituality and attempting to make philosophical speculation more concrete and alive, presented it as a critical reflection on action. This reflection attempts to understand the internal logic of an action through which man seeks fulfillment by constantly transcending himself. Blondel thus contributed to the elaboration of a new apologetics and became one of the most important thinkers of contemporary theology, including the most recent trends. To these factors can be added the influence of Marxist thought, focusing on praxis and geared to the transformation of the world. The Marxist influence began to be felt in the middle of the nineteenth century, but in recent times its cultural impact has become greater. Many agree with Sartre that “Marxism, as the formal framework of all contemporary philosophical thought, cannot be superseded.” Be that as it may, contemporary theology does in fact find itself in direct and fruitful confrontation with Marxism, and it is to a large extent due to Marxism’s influence that theological thought, searching for its own sources, has begun to reflect on the meaning of the transformation of this world and the action of man in history. Further, this confrontation helps theology to perceive what its efforts at understanding the faith receive from the historical praxis of man in history as well as what its own reflection might mean for the transformation of the world. Finally, the rediscovery of the eschatological dimension in theology has also led us to consider the central role of historical praxis. Indeed, if human history is above all else an opening to the future, then it is a task, a political occupation, through which man orients and opens himself to the gift which gives history its transcendent meaning: the full and definitive encounter with the Lord and with other men. “To the truth,” as the Gospel says, thus acquires a precise and concrete meaning in terms of the importance of action in Christian life. Faith in a God who loves us and calls us to the gift of full communion with him and brotherhood among men and not only is not foreign to the transformation of the world; it leads necessarily to the building up of that brotherhood and communion in history. Moreover, only by doing this truth will our faith be “verified,” in the etymological sense of the word. From this notion has recently been derived the term orthopraxis, which still disturbs the sensitivities of some. The intention, however, is not to deny the meaning of orthodoxy, understood as a proclamation of and reflection on statements considered to be true. Rather, the goal is to balance and even to reject the primacy and almost exclusiveness which doctrine has enjoyed in Christian life and above all to modify the emphasis, often obsessive, upon the attainment of an orthodoxy which is often nothing more than fidelity to an obsolete tradition or a debatable interpretation. In a more positive vein, the intention is to recognize the work and importance of concrete behavior, of deeds, of action, or praxis in the Christian life. “And this, it seems to me, has been the greatest transformation which has taken place in the Christian conception of existence,” said Edward Schillebeeckx in an interview. “It is evident that thought is also necessary for action. But the Church has for centuries devoted her attention to formulating truths and meanwhile did almost nothing to better the world. In other words, the Church focused on orthodoxy and left orthopraxis in the hands of nonmembers and nonbelievers.” In the last analysis, this concern for praxis seeks to avoid the practices which gave rise to Bernanos’ sarcastic remark: “God does not choose the same men to keep his word as to fulfill it.” Critical Reflection All the factors we have considered have been responsible for a more accurate understanding that communion with the Lord inescapably means a Christian life centered around on a concrete and creative commitment of service to others. They have likewise led to the rediscovery or explicit formulation of the function of theology as critical reflection. It would be well at this point to define further our terms. Theology must be man’s critical reflection on himself, on his own basic principles. Only with this approach will theology be a serious discourse, aware of itself, in full possession of its conceptual elements. But we are not referring exclusively to this epistemological aspect when we talk about theology as critical reflection. We also refer to a clear and critical attitude regarding economic and socio-cultural issues in the life and reflection of the Christian community. To disregard these is to deceive both oneself and others. But above all, we intend this term to express the theory of a definite practice. Theological reflection would then necessarily be a criticism of society and the Church insofar as they are called and addressed by the Word of God; it would be a critical theory, worked out in the light of the Word accepted in faith and inspired by a practical purpose – and therefore indissolubly linked to historical praxis. By preaching the Gospel message, by its sacraments, and by the charity of its members, the Church proclaims and shelters the gift of the Kingdom of God in the heart of human history. The Christian community professes a “faith which works through charity.” It is – at least ought to be – real charity, action, and commitment to the service of men. Theology is reflection, a critical attitude. Theology follows; it is the second step. What Hegel used to say about philosophy can likewise be applied to theology: it rises only at sundown. The pastoral activity of the Church does not flow as a conclusion from theological premises. Theology does not produce pastoral activity; rather it reflects upon it. Theology must be able to find in pastoral activity the presence of the Spirit inspiring the action of the Christian community. A privileged locus theologicus for understanding the faith will be the life, preaching, and historical commitment of the Church. To reflect upon the presence and action of the Christian in the world means, moreover, to go beyond the visible boundaries of the Church. This is of prime importance. It implies openness to the world, gathering the questions it poses, being attentive to its historical transformations. In the words of Congar, “If the Church wishes to deal with the real questions of the modern world and to attempt to respond to them, … it must open as it were a new chapter of theologico-pastoral epistemology. Instead of using only revelation and tradition as starting points, as classical theology has generally done, it must start with facts and questions derived from the world and from history.” It is precisely this opening to the totality of human history that allows theology to fulfill its critical function vis-à-vis ecclesial praxis without narrowness. This critical task is indispensable. Reflection in the light of faith must constantly accompany the pastoral action of the Church. By keeping historical events in their proper perspective, theology helps safeguard society and the Church from regarding as permanent what is only temporary. Critical reflection thus always plays the inverse role of an ideology which rationalizes and justifies a given social and ecclesial order. On the other hand, theology, by pointing to the sources of revelation, helps to orient pastoral activity; it puts it in a wider context and so helps it to avoid activism and immediatism. Theology as critical reflection thus fulfills a liberating function for man and the Christian community, preserving them from fetishism and idolatry, as well as from a pernicious and belittling narcissism. Understood in this way, theology has a necessary and permanent role in the liberation from every form of religious alienation – which is often fostered by the ecclesiastical institution itself when it impedes an authentic approach to the Word of the Lord. As critical reflection on society and the Church, theology is an understanding which both grows and, in a certain sense, changes. If the commitment of the Christian community in fact takes different forms throughout history, the understanding which accompanies the vicissitudes of this commitment will be constantly renewed and will take untrodden paths. A theology which has as its points of reference only “truths” which have been established once for all – and not the Truth which is also the Way – can be only static and, in the long run, sterile. In this sense the often-quoted and misinterpreted words of Bouillard take on a new validity: “A theology which is not up-to-date is a false theology.” Finally, theology thus understood, that is to say as linked to praxis, fulfills a prophetic function insofar as it interprets historical events with the intention of revealing and proclaiming their profound meaning. According to Cullmann, this is the meaning of the prophetic role: “The prophet does not limit himself as does the fortune-teller to isolated revelations, but his prophecy becomes preaching, proclamation. He explains to the people the true meaning of all events; he informs them of the plan and will of God at the particular moment.” But if theology is based on this observation of historical events and contributes to the discovery of their meaning, it is with the purpose of making the Christians’ commitment within them more radical and clear. Only with the exercise of the prophetic function understood in this way, will the theologian be – to borrow an expression from Antonio Gramsci – a new kind of “organic intellectual.” He will be someone personally and vitally engaged in historical realities with specific times and places. He will be engaged where nations, social classes, people struggle to free themselves from domination and oppression by other nations, classes, and people. In the past analysis, the true interpretation of the meaning revealed by theology is achieved only in historical praxis. “The hermeneutics of the Kingdom of God,” observed Schillebeeckx, “consists especially in making the world a better place. Only in this way will I be able to discover what the kingdom of God means.” We have here a political hermeneutics of the Gospel. Conclusion Theology as a critical reflection on Christian praxis in the light of the Word does not replace the other functions of theology, such as wisdom and rational knowledge; rather it presupposes and needs them. But this is not all. We are not concerned here with a mere juxtaposition. The critical function of theology necessarily leads to redefinition of these other two tasks. Henceforth, wisdom and rational knowledge will more explicitly have ecclesial praxis as their point of departure and their context. It is in reference to this praxis that an understanding of spiritual growth based on Scripture should be developed, and it is through this same praxis that faith encounters the problems posed by human reason. Given the theme of the present work, we will be especially aware of this critical function of theology with the ramifications suggested above. This approach will lead us to pay special attention to the life of the Church and commitments which Christians, impelled by the Spirit and in communion with other people, undertake in history. We will give special consideration to participation in the process of liberation, an outstanding phenomenon of our times, which takes on special meaning in the so-called Third World countries. This kind of theology, arising from concern with a particular set of issues, will perhaps give us the solid and permanent albeit modest foundation for the theology in a Latin American perspective which is both desired and needed. This Latin American focus would not be due to a frivolous desire for originality, but rather to a fundamental sense of historical efficacy and also – why hide it? – to the desire to contribute to the life and reflection of the universal Christian community. But in order to make our contribution, this desire for universality – as well as input from the Christian community as a whole – must be present from the beginning. To concretize this desire would be to overcome particularistic tendencies – provincial and chauvinistic – and produce something unique, both particular and universal, and therefore fruitful. “The only future that theology has, one might say, is to become the theology of the future,” Harvey Cox has said. But this theology of the future must necessarily be a critical appraisal of historical praxis, of the historical task in the sense we have attempted to sketch. Moltmann says that theological concepts “do not limp after reality … The illuminate reality by displaying its future.” In our approach, to reflect critically on the praxis of liberation is not to “limp after” reality. The present in the praxis of liberation, in its deepest dimension, is pregnant with the future; hope must be an inherent part of our present commitment in history. Theology does not initiate this future which exists in the present. It does not create the vital attitude of hope out of nothing. Its role is more modest. It interprets and explains these as the true underpinnings of history. To reflect upon a forward-directed action is not to concentrate on the past. It does not mean being the caboose of the present. Rather it is to penetrate the present reality, the movement of history, that which is driving history toward the future. To reflect on the basis of the historical praxis of liberation is to reflect in the light of the future which is believed in and hoped for. It is to reflect with a view to action which transforms the present. But it does not mean doing this from an armchair; rather it means sinking roots where the pulse of history is beating at this moment and illuminating history with the Word of the Lord of history, who irreversibly committed himself to the present moment of mankind to carry it to its fulfillment. It is for all these reasons that the theology of liberation offers us not so much a new theme for reflection as a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history present. But it does not mean doing this from an armchair; rather it means sinking roots where the pulse of history is beating at this moment and illuminating history with the Word of the Lord of history, who irreversibly committed himself to the present moment of mankind to carry it to its fulfillment. It is for all these reasons that the theology of liberation offers us not so much a new theme for reflection as a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history of mankind and also therefore that part of mankind – gathered into ecclesia – which openly confesses Christ. This is a theology which does not stop with reflecting on the world, but rather tries to be part of the process through which the world is transformed. It is a theology which is open – in the protest against trampled human dignity, in the struggle against the plunder of the vast majority of people, in liberating love, and in the building of a new, just, and fraternal society – to the gift of the Kingdom of God. [1] Cf. The New Man in a New Society and the Church: Theological Reflections from Latin America, Translated and edited by Sister Caridad Inda and John Eagleson, Orbis Books, Maryknoll, New York, pp. 3-15, 1971 [2] What Antonio Gramsci said of philosophy is also true of theology: “It is necessary to destroy the widely-held prejudice that philosophy is something extremely difficult because it is the intellectual activity proper to a certain category of scientific specialists or professional and systematic philosophers. It is necessary, therefore, to demonstrate first that all men are ‘philosophers,’ establishing the parameters and characteristics of this ‘spontaneous philosophy’ proper to ‘everyman.” [3] See Congar’s A History of Theology, trans, and ed. Hunter Guthrie (Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, 1968), based on the DTC article. [4] The terms learned and saintly were interchangeable to a certain point. See Congar, “Theologie,” Foi et theologie,Situation et taches, and Louis Bouyer, The Spirituality of the New Testament and the Fathers (New York: Desclee Company, 1960) [5] “According to classical scholastic theology, the scientific character of theology consists in its systematization … The role of reason is confined to clarity of exposition.” (Comblin, Teologia catolica, p. 71) [6] Ibid., p. 10. Because of this the theological centers close to the magisterium, especially the Roman universities, were invested with greater authority. [7] Cf. Karl Rahner writes, “Dogmatic Theology today has to be theological anthropology, and … such an anthropocentric orientation of theology is both necessary and fruitful” (“Theology and Anthropology,” in The Word in History, ed. T. Patrick Burke [New York: Sheed and Ward, 1966], p. 1) |
|