9 24 1045 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c78821fbc41645fbdd0736310c1f1d3e.mp3 f0c7ac370f7c2f3bc4ec76c67a02d929 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost X Series The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace Scripture Text Genesis 16:4, 21:9, Galatians 5:26 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950813 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-08-13 Title A name given to the resource Sarah and Hagar: Manipulation, Meanness and Bitter Fruit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on August 13, 1995 entitled "Sarah and Hagar: Manipulation, Meanness and Bitter Fruit", as part of the series "The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace", on the occasion of Pentecost X, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Genesis 16:4, 21:9, Galatians 5:26. https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/029b47a72687a7ce7505078d4bbee73b.mp3 41d5b6da142f59c71b68ac21bf2c0d3c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost VIII Series The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace Scripture Text Isaiah 43:18-10, Revelation 21:3 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950730 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-07-30 Title A name given to the resource Finally Home Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 30, 1995 entitled "Finally Home", as part of the series "The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace", on the occasion of Pentecost VIII, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 43:18-10, Revelation 21:3. https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a69a7722768f2bcfb507b5388729eaf6.mp3 ae93876fb974b1adafd49dfe1d9a5487 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost VII Series The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace Scripture Text Genesis 6:1-8, 9:1-7, 9:20-29, II Corinthians 4:7-15 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950723 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-07-23 Title A name given to the resource Noah: Tipsy Sailor Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 23, 1995 entitled "Noah: Tipsy Sailor", as part of the series "The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace", on the occasion of Pentecost VII, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Genesis 6:1-8, 9:1-7, 9:20-29, II Corinthians 4:7-15. https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/dde41ea773f26bd214d625c5a5889d2d.mp3 a674a9a009f843e51b5125b315455137 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost VI Series The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace Scripture Text Genesis 4:1-16, I John 4:7-21, Matthew 5:44-48 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950716 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-07-16 Title A name given to the resource Cain: Sin Crouches at the Door Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 16, 1995 entitled "Cain: Sin Crouches at the Door", as part of the series "The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace", on the occasion of Pentecost VI, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Genesis 4:1-16, I John 4:7-21, Matthew 5:44-48. https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/8531a6c67128d6afb521853d269fd813.mp3 b82415156cb286fcaf18a64b8e174f10 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Pentecost V Series The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace Scripture Text Genesis 2:17, Revelation 22:2 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950709 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-07-09 Title A name given to the resource Adam and Eve - Mudslide or Emergence? Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 9, 1995 entitled "Adam and Eve - Mudslide or Emergence?", as part of the series "The Human Story: Paradigms of Grace", on the occasion of Pentecost V, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Genesis 2:17, Revelation 22:2. https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/312834ffa6f260cb9ec4ec06581145e9.pdf bcf170f5ed80ce39571fa7eb8e404350 PDF Text Text Founding Vision: Floundering Independence Day Weekend Text: Isaiah 58:12; Romans 12:2 Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan July 2, 1995 Transcription of the spoken sermon Let me simply try to give a word that will wind together the various pieces of this morning as we've thought about our nation, about our present situation, the challenge before us. It seems to me that that song elicits from us that which is deepest in us. It is the poets that draw out that which is noble, and I really believe there is a great reservoir of good people and of good heart in the American people, frankly in the people of the world. And I believe that it is poetry in song that moves us in our depths and allows that which is best about us to come to expression. It is finally the vision that will beckon us to realize that high goal of the rule of God, moving toward the Shalom of which the prophets spoke. Our world is in crisis, and our nation is in crisis. It is not an overstatement to speak in our day of culture wars. But it is good for us to know that that's really nothing new. There has always been in this land protest, taking to the streets, the political process, the lobbying for advantage, the clamor for rights and for human dignity. And in our particular situation today, maybe the nub of it in this nation, in a time of transition and a lot of social unrest and turmoil, centers around whether or not we can realize that founding vision which is floundering. Whether or not we can realize that grand dream of our founding documents and the passion that filled the lives of those who came to this land to create an experiment in freedom. The question of whether or not there is an American culture, an American dream that is rooted in reality, that is reflective of truth. One of the great tension points in our society today can be understood under that catch word "multiculturalism." There are voices from the margins, the minorities, the outsiders who are saying, "Hey, you tell your history and you have an identity which is caught up in the myth of the melting pot. But some of us never got included. Some of us have been left out. You tell the American story, but it's not reflective of the part that we've played. And you tell the American story and you gloss over some of the dark shadows that lie across it." And so we have voices, and they clamor to be heard. And then some of us who have been so steeped in the tradition and so blessed by it grow defensive, and we grow hostile and, before © Grand Valley State University   �Founding Vision: Floundering Richard A. Rhem Page 2   we know it, there is a great gulf separating us. The right and the left. Us and them. And the nation is torn with tension and strife. But it seems to me that, on this anniversary of our nation's founding, it's important to us to hear that word from the Lord and to see whether or not that founding vision is not rooted deeply in the biblical tradition. I think it is. Giving all due to the claims of those who have been excluded and have been left out and have been hurt, nonetheless, there is a magnificent vision there, a vision of human dignity, of human freedom, in responsible community. I think that Jon is quite right - the government will not do it for us. And it is for the people of God to lead the way. There was that day when God's people said, "Look, we're doing all of our religious thing. We fast and you don't hear." And then the word of the Lord came saying, "Take care of the poor. Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, take the homeless into your homes. Then you'll call and I will hear. Then you will seek me and I will be found by you. Then the dawn will break upon you. Then you will raise again the foundations of the generations. Then, then there will be streets in which you can dwell in safety." It's almost as though the prophet could have written yesterday rather than way back in ancient Judah. But the point of the vision was that God is known and experienced in the doing of justice and in the loving of mercy. And in that founding vision, although it was not broad enough, although it was not inclusive enough, it was nonetheless rooted in that prophetic vision that comes to us as a gift from Israel's faith, that understanding of God as the Creator. Our founding documents root human dignity and human freedom in the Creator God, and we cannot in 1995 be Americans first any more than we can be Christians only. Our world is the size of a grapefruit. We live in a global community with intimate connection with a multiple diversity of this globe. It is time for the bells to sound, the bells to sound that celebrate the diversity of life, that can still find its unity and its coherence in its grounding in the Creator god who calls us to justice laced with compassion. When I think of the task I read in the vision, something within me melts. I know it's true. And I observe the world and I could weep. Ready to throw up my hands and say, "Why preach? Why strive? Why continue to care? It goes against the grain of human nature. It's so contrary to every other aspect of our lives. Why continue to raise one's voice and hold up the vision and call people to dream the dream?" But then I remember that human transformation is possible. This is what Paul was writing about. "Be not conformed to this world." Do not give in to its aggressiveness and to its consumerism, to its competitiveness and to its destructiveness. Do not give in to its rugged individualism and its selfishness. Do not give in. Continue to dream. Continue to have rumors of Shalom floating across the atmosphere through the transformation of your mind. That's what it really takes, folks. It really takes a transformation; it takes an altered consciousness. It calls us to a whole new way of being. Be not conformed © Grand Valley State University �Founding Vision: Floundering Richard A. Rhem Page 3   to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind to find the will of God, what is good and is true and acceptable. And down deep there's something in me that so yearns for that. And I believe it does for you, as well. If we could just turn the decibels down, that shouting across the great divide. If the Church, if the people of God could be at the forefront of reconciliation rather than the catalyst for division, if we could just listen to our hearts, if we could just follow the song, if we could just make real the songs we love to sing. Of America the Beautiful, thine alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears. Dear God, is it not worth a commitment of life anew on this Independence Day Weekend? God grant it. © Grand Valley State University � https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cfe6d754b8c5005eec11dc17a364a063.mp3 8c295f0573846872560174d493fb9adf Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Independence Day Weekend, Pentecost IV Scripture Text Isaiah 58:12, Romans 12:2 Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01_RA-0-19950702 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-07-02 Title A name given to the resource Founding Vision: Floundering Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 2, 1995 entitled "Founding Vision: Floundering", on the occasion of Independence Day Weekend, Pentecost IV, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 58:12, Romans 12:2. Global Community Inclusive Shalom Transformation https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f194e37cf293c95758d9a0eed9b945c3.pdf 8a2657f06a87aca869a86efc53ba58f6 PDF Text Text R.C.A. Identity: A Call to Ecumenical Community Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in New Brunswick Theological Seminary Newsletter Spring 1987, pp. 11-13 Since my mentor and very good friend, Hendrikus Berkhof, has suggested in an interview for Perspectives conducted by Paul Fries that “identity problems might be both a sign and fostering of spiritual decline,” I have reflected on this endeavor in the Reformed Church and recognized that the question of identity has been consciously or unconsciously with me for the past fifteen years in my pastoral ministry at Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan. Berkhof’s response to Paul Fries’ question about identity convinces me that he taught me well in the four years I spent with him, for it was immediately following those years during which I glimpsed the broad spectrum of Reformed thought, far broader and grander than my own Midwestern roots and training had led me to believe, that I returned to the local parish and led the congregation of the First Reformed Church of Spring Lake to change its name of 101 years to Christ Community Church. In 1971 identity was a major concern. Our name change was a deliberate and intentional decision to be an ecumenical community constituted by the blending of traditions and the moving away from parochialism and narrow denominationalism. We were very careful to emphasize that we were not a community church organized around a credal base which was the lowest common denominator of those assembled. We were seeking to become Christ's people, Christ's community and to define Christ we were shaped by our Reformed heritage and sought to be enriched in our understanding by the other great Christian traditions. We drew from the whole spectrum of Christian tradition. Paul said, “everything belongs to you!” and so we mined the gold of several traditions. Thus we honored the past but we determined to define ourselves by a new name which pointed not to the whence from which we had come, but the whither toward which we sensed the Spirit was leading us. Identity was a major concern. We used the new name to create a new sense of identity. That new identity prepared us as a congregation to be open and ready to receive all who came, © Grand Valley State University   �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 2   encouraged to come because the new name projected a new image into the larger community, an image of openness offering the healing grace of Jesus Christ. Identity Arises Out of Vision Identity as Christ's community, a genuinely ecumenical expression of the Body of Christ, was not arrived at through careful study and introspection, but rather arose spontaneously out of the vision of being an ecumenical community. That vision is true to our Reformed heritage at its best. Calvin was deeply concerned for the reunion of the Church. In his book The History and Character of Calvinism, J. T. McNeill writes: His warm response to Archbishop Cranmer's proposal for a consensus (1552) (He would cross ten seas if he could be of service), and his return to this project in a letter to Archbishop Parker (1560) suggesting the summoning of a meeting of Protestant clergy 'wherever dispersed', are among many proofs of his constant readiness to promote the consolidation of the Churches of the Reformation. Late in 1560 he proposed ‘a free and universal council’ to end the divisions and ‘reunite all Christianity!’ He even declared his willingness that the pope should preside in the Council on condition that he undertake to submit to its decisions. (p. 200) Over the years of our history we have not exhibited the same passion for unity as we find in Calvin, although, along with much parochialism and fearful defensiveness, there has always been an ecumenical impulse. On the basis of the past fifteen years at the local parish level I can say without qualification that a Reformed heritage can find true expression in the creation of a genuinely ecumenical community that embraces the whole spectrum of Christian tradition. We have become a truly ecumenical community. Diversity is the consistent hallmark of Christ Community. We have grown with persons from a wide diversity of traditions and confessional backgrounds. We have maintained a marked theological posture shaped by the Reformed tradition, the very personal nature of relationship to God out of our roots in Protestant pietism, the radicality of Grace of the Lutheran tradition, openness to the Spirit's manifestation from the Charismatic community, and the richness of liturgy and sacramental understanding of the Catholic and Episcopal traditions. Such diversity has been self-consciously embraced and cultivated. There is a little something to remind everyone of their roots and thus to be “at home.” Yet the central focus on grace and the real embodiment of grace — the possession of all the diverse traditions — is so dominant that diversity is transcended in a deeper sense of the unity that makes us one in Christ Jesus. The blending of traditions has made for a rich tapestry: we have become a “Christ Community!” It was that vision that captivated us in the beginning. The vision was the catalyst, the driving force. It has been realized through the breaking up of traditionalism, © Grand Valley State University �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 3   what Jeroslav Pelikan calls the dead faith of the living and the forging of a new tradition, what he calls the living faith of the dead. Vision Must Be Intentionally Implemented Forging a new tradition, bringing the Eternal Gospel to new expression is precisely the genius of the Reformed Faith at its best. It must be worked at selfconsciously and intentionally. In honest confrontation with the Scripture and in obedience to Christ, a church must determine what the Spirit is calling it to be and then work self-consciously to that end. Some years ago we attempted to articulate what we felt we were being called to be. This is how we perceived our identity: Christ Community is theologically self-conscious; it is catholic, evangelical and reformed. It is firmly rooted in the historic Christian tradition: catholic in that it seeks to express the one, holy, and apostolic faith symbolized in the Apostles Creed; evangelical in that it believes that God's supreme revelation of Himself and the Good News of His grace appeared in Jesus Christ — “Our message is that God was making friends of all persons through Christ”; reformed in that its articulation of the faith finds its authority in the Scriptures and is never finished, but rather needs constant reformation and new translation, that it may be understood afresh in every age. Believing in God's eternal purposes of love for the whole created order, ours is a theology of Grace. Grace is the heart of our theology, and the Church is that community of persons who have received God's grace in Christ and who extend that grace to one another in Jesus' name. In the proclamation of the Word in worship, the nurturing of the community in study, the life of the community in fellowship and the action of the community in mission, grace is the keynote, the needs of persons primary, and the healing and wholeness of persons realizing their full human potential to the glory of God, our goal. Believing in the Sovereignty of God in the totality of the created order, and in the Lordship of Christ in the full range of human existence, we are seeking to bring the whole of life under the aegis of God's gracious rule — fashioning here a center for creative Christian living, enabling a fully human existence.... We sought to envision our ministry as we entered the present decade. The following posture has informed us: Our world has become so small, the means of communication and data processing so sophisticated and effective and society so dynamic that it is very difficult to foresee very far into the future trends and movements which may develop. Thus, it is not fruitful to project with fine details the shape of the future ministry of the Church. In such a rapidly changing world it is imperative that a congregation have a clear sense of identity, knowing who it is, what it is seeking to become and the mission to which it is committed. Having set that forth in the previous section, we seek here to affirm that it is our intention to be sensitive to the shifting scenes of the © Grand Valley State University �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 4   religio-cultural spectrum and flexible in our structure and program, ready to engage the human situation at any point at which the Good News can be proclaimed and incarnated.... Believing that God is ahead of us and beckons us from the future, we will test the spirits of the age, open ourselves to the expanding horizons of knowledge and encourage the pursuit of truth along the whole spectrum of human endeavor. Faithful to Jesus Christ and true to ourselves, we will shape our structure and our program and execute our mission with openness, freedom and confidence in the coming Kingdom of God. Such a posture finds expression throughout the life of the congregation. Perhaps the most visible expression of what we have become takes place in corporate worship. Here we have sought to be true to our Reformed heritage while enriching it by reaching back into the Catholic tradition. We have made a self-conscious decision to move from the principle of catechetical preaching which is the rule of our Book of Church Order, to the celebration of the Christian Year. Rather than systematically treating the heads of doctrine contained in the Heidelberg Catechism once in four years, we celebrate the cycle of the Christian Year bringing us from Advent in December through Pentecost in June, focusing on the themes of Incarnation, life of Christ, passion, death, resurrection and ascension and the gift of the Spirit. Throughout the summer we deal with the Old Testament and in the fall celebrate our Reformation heritage. Adopting the Christian Year as the determinant for our worship, we have — again, self-consciously — combined the strength of the Reformation tradition with the strength of the Catholic tradition… In seriousness of preparation and care in execution we have sought to have the mark of excellence on all we offer to God in our worship, recognizing that worship is recognizing His “worth!” Our worship is theo-centric, reflective of our Reformed heritage. Emotional stirring, warm feeling, inspiration, comfort and encouragement are certainly important byproducts of worship, but they are byproducts of offering praise and adoration to God. It is in drawing the worshiper out of herself/himself into self-forgetfulness and into God-consciousness that the people of God are truly blessed — a joy and peace grounded in the truth of God’s being and His grace in Jesus Christ. If the glory of God is kept in focus, then the drama of redemption which we remember, re-enact, anticipate, will sweep the worshiper along and, becoming God-intoxicated, will find his/her life inspired, spirit renewed, hope restored, faith quickened. Then one will find new courage to go on again, new insight whereby to gain meaning, understanding. © Grand Valley State University �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Identity and Context of Ministry Identity arises out of a vision and then the vision must be brought to expression deliberately and intentionally; and finally, the contours of the vision must continue to be adjusted in terms of the historical context of the Church. At times the tides of society may reinforce the vision and aid in its implementation. At other times the vision may have to be pursued against the tide. We have found the latter to be the case. In 1972, Dean Kelly's book, Why Conservative Churches Are Growing, painted the portrait of what kind of church could expect to grow in the present sociological climate. The portrait was diametrically opposite of the vision which we were seeking to realize. Kelly has proved to be a prophet. As the authors of Habits of the Heart declare: ...To the extent that privatization succeeded, religion was in danger of becoming, like the family, “a haven in a heartless world,” but one that did more to reinforce that world, by caring for its casualties, than to challenge its assumptions. (p. 224) In a recent national sampling of Catholic opinion, the two things most desired were “personal and accessible priests” and “warmer, more personal parishes!” The authors [of Habits of the Heart] comment, The salience of these needs for personal intimacy in American religious life suggests why the local Church like other voluntary communities, indeed like the contemporary family, is so fragile, requires so much energy to keep it going, and has so faint a hold on commitment when such needs are not met. (p. 232) RCA Identity? The search for identity in the Reformed Church in America must be an endeavor to discover who God is calling us to be that we may move toward renewed faithfulness in our witness to the Gospel of His grace. It must not be an attempt to shape a community of convenience for a people wanting to feel good in an association of warm hearted, like-thinking others. To cater to that impulse identified as increasingly prominent in our society by Bellah and the others in Habits of the Heart would be to prostitute the Church and deny her Lord. We ought never to live easily with the reality of denominationalism and the tension must be kept on us as we search for our identity as a denomination. In his recently published book, Foolishness to the Greeks, Lesslie Newbigin calls for a confrontation of Western Culture by the Gospel. In the final chapter, “What Must We Be? The Call To The Church,” Newbigin writes: © Grand Valley State University �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 6   The Church is the bearer to all nations of a gospel that announces the kingdom, the reign, and the sovereignty of God, and so to become corporately a sign, instrument, and foretaste of that sovereignty of the one true and living God over all nature, all nations, and all human lives. It is not meant to call men and women out of the world into a safe religious enclave but to call them out in order to send them back as agents of God's kingship. (p. 124) What does such a calling imply? Newbigin asks. Believing we are at a major transitional point in Western Culture not unlike the upheaval in the time of Augustine when he formulated for Christendom a vision based on the twin dogmas of Trinity and Incarnation in place of the classical vision that had lost its power, Newbigin lists seven essentials for the Church if it is to engage the culture with the Gospel. I cite only one essential — The necessity of a radical theological critique of the theory and practice of denominationalism. He writes: It is the common observation of sociologists of religion that denominationalism is the religious aspect of secularization. It is the form that religion takes in a culture controlled by the ideology of the Enlightenment. It is the social form in which the privatization of religion is expressed. The denomination provides a shelter for those who have made the same choice. It is thus in principle unable to confront the state and society as a whole with the claim with which Jesus confronted Pilate — the claim of the truth. It is not, in any biblical sense, the Church, (p. 145) Such a Church, either as a denomination or as several denominations joined in “reconciled diversity” cannot be the agents of a missionary confrontation with our culture, Newbigin claims, for the simple reason that they are themselves the outward and visible signs of an inward and spiritual surrender to the ideology of our culture. They cannot confront our culture with the witness of the truth since even for themselves they do not claim to be more than associations of individuals who share the same private opinions. (p. 145ff) What is needed? A genuinely ecumenical movement...a movement seeking to witness to the Lordship of Christ over the whole inhabited oikoumene cannot take the form of a federation of denominations. It must patiently seek again what the Reformers sought — “To restore the face of the Catholic Church!” (p. 146) That is precisely the genius of our heritage. Perhaps we will recover that sense of being the one holy catholic Church, demonstrating in our life an inclusiveness which embraces diversity and offering our life for the realization of the unity of © Grand Valley State University �A Call To Ecumenical Community Richard A. Rhem Page 7   the whole Church and the recovery of the true identity of the People of God in the world. References: Robert Bellah et al. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. First published 1985; University of California Press, New Preface edition, 2007 Lesslie Newbigin. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Robert Bellah et al, Habits of the Heart, 1985, Lesslie Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks, 1986. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19870301 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-03-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource R.C.A. Identity: A Call to Ecumenical Community Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available New Brunswick Theological Seminary Newsletter Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 1, 1987 entitled "R.C.A. Identity: A Call to Ecumenical Community", it appeared in New Brunswick Theological Seminary Newsletter, Vol 15, pp. 11-13. Tags: Ecumenical, Reformed Church, Diversity, Liturgical Year, Community of Grace. Scripture references: Robert Bellah et al, Habits of the Heart, 1985, Lesslie Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks, 1986. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Community of Grace Diversity Ecumenical Liturgical Year Reformed Church https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6d849180ee042e274227ca09da5896cc.pdf e4ad402279d58bd9cd5f11d405cd1975 PDF Text Text Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 1 Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Introductory Reflections for the Articles Page December 12, 2012 At my retirement in 2004, Christ Community Church was exceedingly gracious in so many ways, one of which was to collect a number of my sermons and publish them under the title Re-Imagining the Faith. I could not have named it as well; it succinctly expressed the story of my thirty-seven years as pastor of that congregation. It was at the First Reformed Church of Spring Lake, Michigan, that I was ordained to the Christian ministry on June 30, 1960. From 1960, just out of seminary, to 1964 I served that Spring Lake congregation. During those four years I was in no way seeking to re-imagine the Christian faith; in fact, I would have been threatened by the thought. My understanding of Christian faith was orthodox, evangelical in the Reformed tradition as conveyed by the Dutch Reformed Church rooted in the Netherlands and brought to this country in the nineteenth century emigration from the Netherlands. It was, however, in those four years through pastoral experience that my orthodoxy was being tested. That whole story is critical to my theological pilgrimage, but I won’t go into it here, except to say that a move to a very conservative, evangelical Reformed congregation in New Jersey [in 1964] only accentuated my struggle, which was really about the view and authority of Scripture. I left New Jersey for the Netherlands to pursue post-graduate studies. I was indeed fortunate to be received and accepted by Professor Dr. Hendrikus Berkhof, Professor of Dogmatics at Leiden University. As I was leaving his study after my first appointment with him in the early Spring of 1967, I saw a piece of paper pinned on a drape, on which was written: Our little systems have their day; They have their day and cease to be; They are but broken lights of Thee, And Thou, O Lord, art more than they. In those lines by Alfred Lord Tennyson I knew I had found my teacher and my task. My little system had had its day; I longed to find the Sacred Mystery toward whom my little system, now broken, had pointed. Though I had earned a Master of Divinity and a Master of Theology following my BA from Hope College, I was about to embark for the first time in my life on an intellectual and spiritual quest with an open mind and heart – seeking truth wherever it might lead me. For the first time in my life I began with questions rather than answers to be proven and confirmed. It was a liberating moment; finally I was ready to learn. © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 2 Lest I be misunderstood, my failure to gain an education, to learn, was not the fault of the institutions from which I attained degrees, nor the teachers who taught me. To be sure, a denominational seminary has not the task to lead students to new visions of the faith but rather to teach the faith system, the confessional foundation of the church that supports it and governs it. That being said, I must confess the problem was mine. All my energy and intellectual gifts were committed to learning and then teaching evangelical Reformed faith. The last word had been spoken; now it was my calling to proclaim and teach it. And I was deadly serious about it. But no longer. After my little system began to break in those seven years of pastoral ministry, I knew I had to begin again to see if indeed I could come to new insight and understanding that would enable me still to be a Christian minister with a message in which I could passionately believe and proclaim. The fact that at my retirement a book of my sermons was published with the title ReImagining the Faith is the finest tribute I could receive, witnessing to the journey that began in the late 60’s under the guidance of Professor Berkhof and that continued all the years after my return to the Spring Lake congregation in 1971. Through all those years I was about re-imagining the faith and, even in retirement, the journey continues. As I look back over my ministry that continued in Spring Lake following my four-year European sojourn, I realize that what I essentially gained was an ability to think theologically, to think critically. No longer was there a set confessional system of theological propositions to be explained and defended. I was full of wondering, of questioning, of questing for a deeper understanding of biblical faith in the context of contemporary culture. My new posture found expression in preaching and teaching but it was with the birth of the journal Perspectives, a Journal of Reformed Thought in 1986 that I began to articulate that new posture on central theological/biblical themes. My first article was on the theology of Robert Schuller as I will describe below. But from then on I addressed some critical themes that reflected my own groping for a new understanding of biblical faith. As I was working on the thread of those pieces I received a note from Professor Dr. Hendrik Hart who had begun reading the articles I had given him. In response to questions he raised, I gave some background about my experience in the RCA. Our correspondence I include here: Email from Hendrik Hart, November 20, 2012: ... I’m reading Dick’s articles in Perspectives. I was entirely unprepared for them because Dick keeps saying that he was a latecomer in moving beyond conservatism. But the first piece, from 1987, digs into the God-Jesus-male cluster with a vengeance. And so it is with most of the pieces. They are radical in choice of topic, position and approach. They © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 3 are not mealy-mouthed either. The language is clear, direct, and hard-hitting. I would have thought that, early in the game, the pastoral side might emerge, knowing how upset conservatives might be. Not so. So where’s the conservatism? The only evidence for Dick’s pleading a late start in getting beyond conservatism is that the style of argument has not been touched by the then rising postmodern spirit. But that took time for all of us. OK, if I’m near the mark with this, how would you characterize where you were in 1987, Dick? What readings or experiences would have spawned those articles and how did you expect they would be perceived? By your congregation, by your classis, by Perspectives readers? I am curious because, if I go by my own memories, I think there was a mixture of urgency and naiveté. In 1983 I wrote “Must I Believe in God as Father?” in The Banner. It was a soapbox piece and the editor and I had previously discussed at length how this should be done. I think I wrote very carefully, so I was fully unprepared for the storm of invective that broke over me, as well as for the complete silence of supporters. Only now (right now!) does it occur to me that the problem may well not have been the piece as such (it was about praying to God as Mother), but the heading. Why did I not see that 30 years ago? So, if you can, tell us something about why you may have written things possibly unaware of how they would be perceived or of how you would endanger yourself. Did you know you were taking risks? Reply from Richard Rhem: Henk, great to hear from you and I am pleased you are reading the articles. It so happens that I have spent over a week gathering my writings over the years of my ministry post Netherlands. (I have a few more for you, especially two pieces that appeared in The Reformed Review, Western Seminary’s journal. In 1972 I gave a lecture at Western which was published in The Reformed Review – “A Theological Conception of Reality as History – Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg.” Then in 1986 I wrote in a [tribute] for Gene Osterhaven – “Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age” – which dealt with Küng’s paradigm change in connection with Tracy and referring to Gadamer, etc. Those three pieces were received quite well. Then the RCA founded Perspectives. I just found the first editorial by Rev. Dr. James Van Hoeven – first editor and major figure behind the project. (That he was brother-inlaw to Ed Mulder, General Secretary, got the Journal underway.) Jim wanted me on the board of editors and immediately asked that I write about Schuller’s new reformation. I had been inspired by Bob Schuller upon my return from the Netherlands - my leadership people felt, having been out of the country for four years, I needed such exposure. It worked. Within four months of beginning again in Spring Lake, the First Reformed Church became Christ Community and a second service in the morning was added (and eventually a third). About 28 of our people attended Schuller’s Institute for Successful Church Leadership. But Bob Schuller was under fire for his book New Reformation and being too easy on sin!! Therefore Jim Van Hoeven thought I should do an article on Schuller. It was quite well received. You ask about whether I wrote with awareness of reaction from the church. I’m sure I was naive but, according to Jim’s first editorial, this new journal’s purpose was to “engage issues that reformed Christians meet in personal, ecclesiastical, and societal life.” It also aimed to be in conversations that “help shape the identity and mission of the Reformed Church in America.” © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 4 Jim continues, “If in the process, Perspectives can enable a community of scholars to be formed – women and men from within the church who bridge race, region, and discipline, who enjoy the give and take of thoughtful discourse, and who do not mind if their Sundays sometimes get pretty rough [an allusion to a Mark Twain quote with which he opened] – this enterprise will have fulfilled its expectations.” The editorial moves to a quote from Robert Bly: “Certainty lives on either side of the border, but truth lives on the border.” Jim continues, “The editors of Perspectives will push themselves and the church toward that border, theologically. This means, on the one hand, Perspectives will affirm and deepen the richness of the Reformed tradition. Tradition tells us who we are, gives us a definition, a point from which to set our course, and reminds us ‘we belong...to our faithful Savior Jesus Christ.’ And yet truth lives on the border. The danger of too much tradition is that it turns a good thing into idolatry. The church’s faith and life must always be creative. …holding to the tradition, being creative, living on the border is part of what it means to be Reformed, according to the Word of God.” That was January, 1986, the first issue. Perspectives was initially sent free of charge to ministers, members of boards and agencies, elders on request. It was to engage the leadership of the RCA in creative conversation. I really believed that, naive as I was... It is coincidental that you raise the questions my writings raised as your brother Peter has asked me to write an overview of the thread that runs through my articles to introduce them on a Web site of an archive of my work. I have begun writing after sorting through piles of files. That piece will answer some of your questions, but let me respond to your questions regarding my being a late bloomer. Throughout my education I was trying to reinforce the faith structure of my childhood. I never challenged or raised a question. Yet, beneath my sturdy dogmatism, there was an insecurity: I wondered if the faith/church would survive – not because it wasn’t God’s truth but because the darkness arrayed against the light was formidable. A pastoral experience in Spring Lake showed me that an inerrant, infallible Bible wasn’t enough. During my last year there, the Covenant Life curriculum from the RCA/Presbyterians came out. I taught the foundation papers in Spring Lake and then introduced the curriculum to the New Jersey congregation. It created an uproar from a few who felt it was weak on Scripture [long story]. For me – finally owning my own questions – it was very helpful. I knew I would have to spend years bringing that congregation around or make good on my desire to go to the Netherlands for postgrad work. Berkhof accepted me and proved a great mentor and friend. Thus began my first real education because finally I was open to the quest. But, Henk, I was 32! Four years in Leiden and my return to Spring Lake where I began to preach out of the reservoir of the Leiden years. This I knew: the orthodox view of Scripture was the bottleneck. I felt a real freedom to explore in that marvelous community. I taught Berkhof’s Christian Faith, Küng’s On Being a Christian and Does God Exist? Coming from a serious study of Pannenberg, I was ready for Küng whom I came to appreciate deeply. I mentioned my writings/lectures in The Reformed Review in 1972 and 1986. These were about the theological method. But, as I wrote earlier, it was Perspectives that gave me the occasion to address issues before the church. Yes, I was naive, but I was also totally free in bringing to expression © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 5 what I had been thinking about. Now I was 51, Henk: no youngster, but just finding my voice. I was blessed with a congregation that allowed me to “think out loud”. That was my preaching style and it was a safe and honest place. Thus when Perspectives came along I expressed myself quite honestly. The “Habit of God’s Heart” piece I knew was treading on dangerous terrain, but I tried to be careful, wondering but also being honest about my hope that God’s grace was universal. As time moved on I got the assignments that were controversial because I was a pastor in a safe place. I think there was only one other pastor on the board of Perspectives. The rest were professors at colleges or the seminaries and were reluctant to take on the themes I tackled. So, my conservatism in the traditional form ended when I left for Leiden in 1967. From there I had to begin again. I consumed book after book. Berkhof would say, “You must begin to write,” but I said, “I just found six more footnotes leading to a dozen more books!” Trying to answer your questions: by 1987 I had been engaged in serious theological reading/thinking for 20 years. Perspectives gave me the opportunity to bring to expression all I had been thinking/teaching/preaching about. I felt safe and confident and thus put myself on the line. Perspectives was not the Church Herald, read by RCA lay folk. The Banner was something else. You wrote in a very much more conservative context to a well-informed readership in the bastion of Calvinist orthodoxy. As for “the silence of supporters,” I know that well. When my Grace article appeared, I was teaching homiletics at Western. A colleague also on the board of editors, present and participating in the discussion about the theme, in favor of my writing...but when the storm rose, in a faculty meeting asked, “Why did you feel you had to write that piece?” He also, I’m told, said if I had changed six words there would have been no problem. I must say, Henk, it never occurred to me that I would get into trouble. My congregation was solidly supportive and I had fine collegial relationships with the RCA leadership and I honestly felt I was being a positive influence for good in the RCA. In the end it was not RCA leadership but young, threatened pastors in the Muskegon Classis that spelled my demise in the RCA. It is all quite a story. And now to return to the thread of my articles. My second Perspectives piece was entitled “Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal.” I set forth Barth’s own experience of preaching and the high regard he had for the preaching moment – very inspiring. But then, in a series of articles, I addressed contemporary issues in the Church and my own deepening grasp of those issues. February 1987, pp. 4-6: “An Accident of the Incarnation.” The issue was the male domination of the church. I argued that the maleness of the Incarnation was an “accident,” not of the essence of God’s revelation in human flesh. In the January 1988 issue, I wrote a piece, “Purgatory Revisited.” Hans Küng at the University of Michigan in the Fall of 1983 lectured on questions surrounding death, © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 6 heaven, hell and the future, subsequently published under the title Eternal Life. Küng got me to thinking. I suspect it was a beginning step toward the hope of universal grace. In the September 1988, issue I brought to full expression my hope and growing conviction that God’s grace would finally bring all God’s children home. The piece, entitled “The Habits of God’s Heart”, elicited major responses from RCA ministers and the public readership – positive and negative, the latter predominant. In the April 1991, issue I became even bolder. I wrote of my growing conviction that my faith community, the community of Reformed faith issuing from Calvin’s Geneva by way of the Netherlands had never come to terms with the Enlightenment - the place of critical rationality and historical consciousness in the understanding of the Christian credal tradition as espoused by the Reformed community in this country. It was Hendrikus Berkhof’s Two Hundred Years of Theology that made me aware that the community of which I was a part “was not even engaged in the struggle.” The article was entitled “Sleeping Through a Revolution.” As one can well imagine, I got some serious response, including from my beloved theology professor, Dr. Eugene Osterhaven – who treated me gently however. Someone challenged me on biblical grounds, on my use of Scripture. That drove me on to my next piece, “The Book That Binds Us” in the December 1992, issue. My bold contention was that the Bible is being misused. It is being asked to function in a way it can no longer be expected to function, a way it was never intended to function. In the March 1993, issue I returned to the theme of “An Accident of the Incarnation” with a focus on God language. I wrote in collaboration with my colleague, Colette Volkema De Nooyer, who did the major work. In the May 1995 issue, I “completed” as it were the thread I was weaving with an article “Interreligious Dialogue – What is Required of Us?” I had recognized long since that the orthodox understanding of Jesus’ death as atonement blocked openness to the other in interfaith discussion. In this piece I gave that full expression. The article concluded: My intention is not to advocate Hick or Ogden or any other thinker who is addressing the matter of interreligious dialogue. Rather, I wish to point to the necessity of honestly drawing out the consequences of the recognition that human grasp of the truth develops, evolves, and needs ongoing assessment and adjustment – and sometimes conceptions need to be rejected. By use of historical imagination, the originating experience that gave rise to a theological formulation needs to be recovered in order to express the same reality differently, in order to make the experience available in a totally different cultural context. Rather than seeing this as a burden, a cause for fear and defensiveness, it should be seen as an exciting challenge. Is not such a pursuit of the truth to love God with mind as well as heart? And is not the recognition that every biblical and theological expression is marked by the human and historical limitations that adhere to all human thought the © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 7 reason there is need for continual reformation? To be Reformed is not to be in possession of a set of timeless and eternal truths but, rather, to refuse to absolutize any human arrangement or formulation. It is not to be saddled with a set of truths that were once new, innovative, and destabilizing of the established order of the sixteenth century, or the first century. It is an approach, a spirit, a posture that is open to new knowledge, fresh insight, and cumulative human experience within historical development. The church has managed to spend the century in a state of schizophrenia, pursuing research in the academy and sharing the results in the lecture hall, while the liturgy, prayers, hymns, and sermons have given little evidence of the honest engagement with insights of the modern period. My mentor, Hendrikus Berkhof, claimed the only heresy was to make the gospel boring. I would add another – the heresy of orthodoxy, the evidence of a failure of nerve and lack of trust in the living God. It is the heresy of an inordinate lust for certitude that seeks premature closure, the shutting down of the quest for truth and growth of knowledge in the magnificent and mysterious cosmos by the creatures whom the Creator calls to consciousness and embraces in a Grace that pervades the unfolding cosmic process. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Series Introduction to Articles Page in Web Archive Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-20121212 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Introduction to the Articles created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) entitled "Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage", as part of the series "Introduction to Articles Page in Web Archive". Tags: Spiritual Quest, Reformed Theology, Authority of Scripture, Critical Thinking, Universal Grace, Orthodoxy, Nature of Religion, Sacred Mystery. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2012-12-12 Authority of Scripture Critical Thinking Nature of Religion Orthodoxy Reformed Theology Sacred Mystery Spiritual Quest Universal Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/93aed9789a39f61b02a11edf6161b98a.pdf 206ce9e3f9177d7e4dccb6bfa35ace3c PDF Text Text As One Without Authority Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Free Spirit A Quarterly Publication of Fountain Street Church, Grand Rapids, Michigan Summer 2001 During a brief stint when I taught Homiletics, I gathered a number of books on the art of preaching, one of which had a title which struck me and has always remained with me - As One Without Authority. It was authored by Fred Craddock, perhaps the premier professor of preaching in the country for over three decades. The title registered so deeply with me because it was the most concise and profound description of the preacher I had ever encountered. First published in 1971, the book was Craddock's response to the “crisis of preaching” which was being widely discussed at the time. Preaching had been receiving very negative press, the whole discipline called in question, and there was experimentation in alternatives to the traditional sermon. In the wake of the tumultuous sixties and the challenge to all of society's structures and institutions, including the church, there was serious doubt as to the viability of the church in general and especially the sermon as an effective instrument of communication in particular. Craddock addressed the issue head on, acknowledging the legitimacy of much of the criticism of traditional preaching, but affirming his continuing confidence in the place and power of the spoken word. But the only hope for preaching in the present historical context was for the preacher to recognize that he or she was “as one without authority.” Of course, this had been true since the rise of the Modern age, especially in the wake of the Enlightenment, and classical Liberalism of the nineteenth century was an attempt to accommodate the Christian faith tradition to the knowledge of the modern world. The Liberal movement was a recognition of the loss of all forms of authoritarianism - of tradition in Eastern orthodoxy, of the church in Roman Catholicism, and the Bible in Protestantism. Still, in large measure, these respective confessional traditions managed to ward off the acids of modernity and operate as though the traditional sources of authority remained in place. © Grand Valley State University   �As One Without Authority Richard A. Rhem Page 2   That was my experience. Graduating from seminary in 1960 and assuming my first pastorate in Spring Lake in the congregation I now serve (although after four years I left for a period of seven years, returning in 1971), I came armed with “the authoritative Word of God.” The Bible, inspired by the Holy Spirit, was inerrant and infallible. The preacher's authority lay in the faithful exposition of the biblical text. Even though serious biblical criticism had been around since the late eighteenth century, it was not seriously engaged in the conservative evangelical tradition. But, after seven years of pastoral experience and preaching, I found my authoritarian foundation crumbling. As I became aware of a critical approach to scripture, it was no longer possible for me simply to assert, “The Bible says ....” I had to begin again. I needed a new foundation if I were to continue in a preaching ministry. A European pilgrimage that lasted for four years was not simply a quest for an academic degree, but an existential quest for a religious faith I could believe in with intellectual integrity and preach with authenticity. My search and research were intensive - and the quest continues, but of this I became convinced - there is no authoritarian claim that can ground authentic religious experience, whether the claim be grounded in tradition, church or scripture. The witness to religious experience - in my case, the witness of the preacher, is precisely that - it is witness. One stands within a valued tradition, the tradition is embodied in a community, and the community has a founding story which is the font of the tradition. One may believe the founding vision or event was the revelation, the manifestation, of the Sacred, of the Mystery that grounds Reality, but the expression that gives witness to the vision or that relates the event is human expression. All of the great religious traditions are human, imaginative constructs issuing from the founding experience. Someone has written that all of our present religions are the ossified remains of past prophetic and ecstatic visions. This being the case, one who preaches does so as "one without authority" - one witnesses to that of which one is convinced is good and true and beautiful in order to challenge, inspire, encourage, and comfort those who constitute the community. The preacher knows the tradition through long study and experience and seeks to understand the wisdom and insight that have come to expression in the tradition. And one must know one's own world, as well, having a sensitivity to present human experience, an awareness of what is playing upon one's contemporaries. Only then is one ready to address the community gathered in worship hoping to hear some word that will illumine the human situation. That word must come with authority, but without authoritarian claim. Dietrich Bonhoeffer described the difference thus: Someone can only speak to me with authority if a word from the deepest knowledge of my humanity encounters me here and now in all my reality; any other word is impotent. The word of the Church to the world must therefore encounter the world in all its present reality from the deepest © Grand Valley State University �As One Without Authority Richard A. Rhem Page 3   knowledge of the world, if it is to be authoritative. The Church must be able to say the Word of God, the word of authority, here and now, in the most concrete way possible, from knowledge of the situation. One can see the distinction between authority and authoritarian claim in the comment in the Gospel of Matthew at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount: Now when Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes. The scribes represented the professional religious leadership, guardians of the tradition, whose office had authority, who operated within the established structures of an official religious institution. They made authoritarian claims, but something about Jesus' teaching outside the authorized system carried its own intrinsic authority - Jesus spoke to people and the word found resonance within them because he touched the vital nerve of their present existence. He pierced through to their soul; though he was one without authority, the integrity and authenticity of his word carried weight. Religion in general and Christianity in particular have been marked by authoritarian claims and have sought to control the people. Dostoevsky has the Grand Inquisitor in The Brothers Karamazov rail at Jesus, Thou didst desire man's free love, that he should follow thee freely,... there are three powers, three powers alone, able to conquer and to hold captive for ever the conscience of these impotent rebels for their happiness - those forces are miracle, mystery and authority. Thou hast rejected all three and hast set the example for doing so. Authority in the sense of an authoritarian claim has marked much of the story of the Church, but its day is past and, where it still exists and even seems to thrive, it is the shrill last gasp of a dying enterprise. What is true for the preacher who is as one without authority is true for all areas of religious leadership if we are seeking a spiritual religious experience, or a religion of Spirit. After some fifteen billion years this amazing cosmic drama on whose stage we have appeared relatively so recently has seen the emergence of Spirit. Whether one would speak of purpose and intentionality or prefer, rather, simply to stand in awed awareness at the creative process and revel in the mystery and miracle of the gift of life and of consciousness that enables one to contemplate the wonder of it all and be grateful, the fact is we know of a spiritual dimension as part of our human existence. And where there is Spirit, there is freedom. Where there is Spirit, there is non-coercion. Where there is Spirit, there is no authoritarian claim. © Grand Valley State University �As One Without Authority Richard A. Rhem Page 4   For the preacher, for the religious leader, for the whole enterprise of the Spirit, one must be as one without authority. In the Spirit, one bears witness to one's truth and it will find resonance or not; one offers a vision or a dream and it is embraced or not; to enforce one's word or demand adherence to one's plan can occur only in the absence of the Spirit. One will see it or not, understand it or not, offer allegiance or not. The Spirit's word and way must be embraced freely, affirmation being elicited without threat or coercion, for the Spirit has no power, is completely vulnerable - helpless unless one sees and freely follows. The Spirit is as one without authority and all that is spiritual is defenseless against contradiction. Spirit needs form and too often form is the death of Spirit. The institutionalizing of the Spirit in structures necessitates order and power and thus the dilemma and the question whether a spiritual institution is possible. The greater the success in terms of numbers, facilities, and staff, the greater the threat to the Spirit. The larger the program, the greater the need for large budgets and administrative oversight. Strategies for success seldom begin with the imperative to guard and protect the fragile and vulnerable Spirit. Yet, just as from matter has arisen Spirit embodied in the human, so the human needs community as the embodiment of Spirit. There is no other way. But, let the one who would address a word to such a community and one who would lead such a community recognize that such a one will always be as one without authority. That strong and vibrant religious institutions are possible is without question. History is replete with examples of dominating, controlling institutional religions ascribing their prosperity and power to the blessing of God. Triumphalism and arrogant assertion of divinely vested authoritarian rule have been ever present in the annals of religious history. Whitehead, in his Process and Reality writes, When the Western world accepted Christianity, Caesar conquered ... The brief Galilean vision of humility flickered throughout the ages, uncertainly ... The Church gave unto God the attributes which belonged exclusively to Caesar. Speaking of the Galilean origin of Christianity, Whitehead claims, It does not emphasize the ruling Caesar, or the ruthless morality, or the unmoved mover. It dwells upon the tender elements in the world, which slowly and in quietness operate by love; and it finds purpose in the present immediacy of a Kingdom not of this world. Love neither rules, nor is it unmoved; also it is a little oblivious as to morals. It does not look to the future, for it finds its own reward in the immediate present. (pp. 519f) © Grand Valley State University �As One Without Authority Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Surveying the religious landscape, one wonders if the fragile flower of the Spirit can survive, whether there will be eyes to see and ears to hear that truth that comes to expression without authority. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Fred Craddock. As One Without Authority, 1971, revised edition 2001. Alfred North Whitehead.Process and Reality (Gifford Lectures Delivered in Ediinburgh University1927-28), 1929, 2nd edition 1979. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-20010705 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource As One Without Authority Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Free Spirit Journal Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) entitled "As One Without Authority", it appeared in Free Spirit, Fountain Street Church, Summer 2001. Tags: Nature of Religion, Spirit, Freedom, Community of Faith. Scripture references: Fred Craddock. As One Without Authority, 1971, revised edition 2001. Alfred North Whitehead.Process and Reality (Gifford Lectures Delivered in Ediinburgh University1927-28), 1929, 2nd edition 1979. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2001-07-05 Community of Faith Freedom Nature of Religion Spirit https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9b1e3b6bf92dc4352d3a2c9168d15c49.pdf 126f2cdbdc0934a36a55a28aec8fcf98 PDF Text Text Jesus Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Free Spirit A Quarterly Publication of Fountain Street Church Grand Rapids, Michigan May 1999 In a recent study, The Human Christ, Charlotte Allen writes, In 1909, the Modernist Catholic theologian George Tyrrell complained that the liberal German biblical scholars of his day had reconstructed a historical Jesus who was no more than "The reflection of a liberal Protestant face, seen at the bottom of a deep well." In other words, the liberal searchers had found a liberal Jesus. The same can be said of the Jesus-searchers of every era: The deists found a deist, the Romantics a Romantic, the existentialists an existentialist, and the liberationists a Jesus of class struggle. Supposedly equipped with the latest critical and historical tools, the "scientific" quest for the historical Jesus has nearly always devolved into theology, ideology, and even autobiography. (P. 5) This has been widely recognized as being the case and I readily acknowledge it to be operative in my own reflection on the identity, life and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. This criticism has been met head on by a contemporary Jesus scholar recognized for both the breadth of his research into Christian origins, cross-cultural studies, and carefully articulated methodology. John Dominic Crossan, in his The Birth of Christianity (1998), cites a poem, "For Once, Then, Something," by Robert Frost, Others taunt me with having knelt at well-curbs Always wrong to the light, so never seeing Deeper down in the well than where the water Gives me back in a shining surface picture , Me myself in the summer heaven, godlike, Looking out of a wreath of fern and cloud puffs. Once, when trying with chin against a well-curb, I discerned, as I thought, beyond the picture, © Grand Valley State University   �Jesus Richard A. Rhem Page 2   Through the picture, a something white, uncertain, Something more of the depths - and then I lost it. Crossan comments, There is an oft-repeated and rather cheap gibe that historical Jesus researchers are simply looking down a deep well and seeing their own reflections from below. I call it cheap for three reasons. First, those who use it against others seldom apply it to themselves. Second, it is almost impossible to imagine a reconstruction that could not be dismissed by the assertion of that gibe. Your Jesus is an apocalyptic: You are bemused by the approaching millennium,... What could anyone ever say that would not fall under that ban? Third, those who repeat that taunt so readily must never have looked down a deep well or heeded Emily Dickinson's warning (3.970, no. 1400): What mystery pervades a well!... But nature is stranger yet; The ones that cite her most Have never passed her haunted house, Nor simplified her ghost. Crossan continues, Imagine two alternative and opposite modes of historical reconstruction, one an impossible delusion, the other a possible illusion. The possible illusion is narcissism. You think you are seeing the past or the other when all you see is your own reflected present. You see only what was there before you began. You imprint your own present on the past and call it history. Narcissism sees its own face, and, ignoring the water that shows it up, falls in love with itself. It is the first of the twin images in Frost's poem. It is when, …the water Gives me back in a shining surface picture Me myself in the summer heaven, godlike, Looking out of a wreath of fern and cloud puffs. The impossible delusion is positivism. It imagines that you can know the past without any interference from your own personal and social situation as answer. You can see, as it were, without your own eye being involved. You can discern the past once and for all forever and see it pure and uncontaminated by that discernment. Positivism is the delusion that we can see the water without our own face being mirrored in it. It thinks we can see the surface without simultaneously seeing our own eyes. It is the © Grand Valley State University �Jesus Richard A. Rhem Page 3   second of the twin images in Frost's poem. It is when, even if only once, uncertainly, possibly, and vaguely, I discerned, as I thought, beyond the picture, Through the picture, a something white, uncertain, Something more of the depths - and then I lost it. But, I would ask, if the poet's face is white, how did it see "through the picture" of itself “a something white” that was also "beyond the picture"? Maybe what it saw was its own face so strangely different that it did not recognize it. That introduces a third image not given but provoked by Frost's second image. There is, therefore, a third alternative, and I'll call it interactivism, which is, incidentally, the way I understand post-modernism. The past and present must interact with one another, each changing and challenging the other, and the ideal is an absolutely fair and equal reaction between one another. Back to the well: You cannot see the surface without simultaneously seeing, disturbing, and distorting your own face; you cannot see your own face without simultaneously seeing, disturbing, and distorting the surface. It is the third image begging to be recognized behind the two overt ones in Frost's poem. What the poet saw was his own face so strangely different that he did not recognize it as such. It was., indeed "something white" and "something more of the depths." But it was not "beyond the picture" or even "through the picture." It was the picture itself changed utterly. That is the dialectic of interactivism and, as distinct from either narcissism or positivism, it is both possible and necessary. (Pp. 40f.) After illustrating his claim, Crossan writes, Historical reconstruction is always interactive of present and past. Even our best theories and methods are still our best ones. They are all dated and doomed not just when they are wrong but even (and especially) when they are right. They need, when anything important is involved, to be done over and over again. That does not make history worthless. We ourselves are also dated and doomed, but that does not make life worthless. (P. 45) Crossan does not speak of "search" or "quest" of Christian origins. That he sees as positivistic. Rather, he attempts a reconstruction and that, he says, must be done over and over again in different times and different places by different groups and different communities. I cite Crossan and Allen to acknowledge that "my Jesus" is not "The Jesus" of history. That Jesus cannot be definitively recovered. Allen's comment about the well has been the easy way to write off the quest. Crossan knows the danger but I © Grand Valley State University �Jesus Richard A. Rhem Page 4   think has, through careful method, eliminated some of the naiveté of earlier efforts. Even before the critique of mentors Duncan and Lester, I was aware that I was replicating the 19th-century liberal Jesus in some respects, but I was also aware that I had to move through that stage. It is not quite accurate, however, to identify the Jesus I have been attempting to reconstruct with that "Jesus, meek and mild." Several issues are involved in my movement from the classical Christological creedal affirmations to Jesus as a human being as the incarnation or embodiment of God or Spirit. I have been working at dismantling the creedal Christ for some time. (Theological reflection is really my focus rather than historical research or even biblical research.) But to dismantle the Christological formulae leaves me with an historical figure and the need to give some content to this figure. Another piece of the traditional orthodox understanding that I have for some years now moved away from is the idea of Jesus' death as atoning, making salvation possible and available. If Jesus did not come into the world to die for human sin, that is, if he is not a salvific figure, what came to expression in his life and teaching and why was he executed? Here is where the work of Crossan and Borg has been helpful to me. By recognizing the Jewishness of Jesus, putting him in his historical context through reconstruction of first-century Judaism under Roman domination and crosscultural studies, there emerges a picture of Jesus as social prophet in the Hebrew tradition who, through non-violent protest, stands against the structural injustice and systemic evil of his society in the name of the God of Israel who is marked by the demand for justice and compassion. This is not the highly moral and gentle Jesus of the 19th century. This one dies the way he dies because he lived the way he lived. I will not go on to argue this, but I think it can be given good biblical support as well as being consistent with our best sense of his social/economic/political context. Why bother so strenuously with Jesus? It is claimed the idea, the meaning of the whole historical/legendary/mythological phenomenon could simply be "thought," conceived by one who contemplated the whole human-divine relationship. Perhaps so. It is claimed Newton's whole grand mechanical model of the universe was a product not of empirical experimentation but of pure thought. But, as a matter of fact, the whole Christian tradition (including its Jewish womb) emerged in history. The "story" is rooted in history and the liturgical and ritual practice represent history as shaped by the early (biblical) interpretations. And story and ritual are critical for creating community -meaning is conveyed in the © Grand Valley State University �Jesus Richard A. Rhem Page 5   telling and action. As Whitehead claimed, it takes centuries to form such tradition. Thus, it seems to me that it is valuable to re-tell the old story and through serious research I think we can uncover that which provides the data by which to reconstruct this historical person who can credibly be offered as an embodiment of the love, grace, compassion and justice of God. The canonical Jesus, however, is no longer believable to one for whom biblical authority in the sense of authoritarian claim is no longer valid. We know the Jesus of the Gospels is the post-Easter Jesus of the early communities. The Christological titles ascribed to him post-Easter are ascriptions of faith arising out of the experience of those early believers. This is where biblical criticism becomes crucial. To be sure, determining which words and deeds go back to Jesus and which are "history metaphorized" by the biblical writers is an inexact science and total agreement will never be achieved. And it is also true that here one's presuppositions - maybe one's intuition - will operate in the selection process. But the moment one decides that the biblical text is not the word of God given by whatever process to the writer, but rather, a human book reflecting the religious experience or revelatory encounter of the writer, one cannot avoid such a discriminating approach to the text. The reconstruction will be the result of the engagement with the text, interaction with the text and the best one can do is be aware of one's pre-understanding and endeavor as honestly as possible to hear the text. Now, in regard to the concatenation of texts gathered by Lester, I obviously hear the voice of the early communities. There is sharp debate as to whether Jesus held the apocalyptic view. I think he moved away from John the Baptist because he did not share that view. If he did think of himself as returning in clouds of heaven soon, of course he was simply wrong - as was Paul! In any case, I would argue that the Jesus of my reconstruction is not a candidate for Rotary. I have explained above why I do not simply shake loose of Jesus - he roots our story, concretizes the image of God. But, I think the Spirit has been embodied in others whose lives shine with revelatory luminosity. And further, I believe that which came to intense expression in him is the truth for all of us - if we have eyes to see it, and seeing it is salvation here and now, knowing the miracle, wonder and glory of being alive, and that's not bad for one without Christology, an authoritative scripture, doctrine of atonement, or ecclesiastical credential! References: Charlotte Allen. The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus. FreePress, 1998. © Grand Valley State University �Jesus Richard A. Rhem Page 6   John Dominic Crossan. The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately After the Execution of Jesus. HarperOne, 1999. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Charlotte Allen, The Human Christ, 1998, John Dominic Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1999 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19990501 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1999-05-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Jesus Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Free Spirit Journal Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on May 1, 1999 entitled "Jesus", it appeared in Free Spirit, Fountain Street Church. Tags: Historical Jesus, Reimagining the Faith, Critical Thinking, Postmodern, Justice. Scripture references: Charlotte Allen, The Human Christ, 1998, John Dominic Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1999. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Critical Thinking Historical Jesus Justice PostModern Reimagining the Faith https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2308a79f451e0b7b398aae5a37b33baf.pdf 759320894839a494b0e424d7e7761f03 PDF Text Text The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism By David Tracy (The Crossroads Publishing Company, 1998) Review By Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Publication of Review Unknown In the Preface to his study David Tracy states the task he sets out for himself: The need is to form a new and inevitably complex theological strategy that will avoid privatism by articulating the genuine claims of religions to truth (p. xi). He claims that theology, by its very nature, asks fundamental existential questions because theology reflects on the reality of God, but it must develop public, not private, criteria and discourse. Recognizing theology addresses three publics: society, academy and church, each of which demands public criteria and discourse, Tracy’s main focus is on Systematic Theology, which he understands as fundamentally a hermeneutical enterprise and his development of that understanding is to claim, The issue of both the meaning and truth of religion is related to the analogous issue of the meaning and truth of art. The central claim advanced is a claim to both meaning and truth in our common human experience of any classic. (p. xii). Tracy recognizes the contemporary emergence of a sociological imagination which he sees as analogous to the earlier rise of historical consciousness and it is in such a social reality that the theologian must work. In such a context the theologian makes his claim. What is that claim? A claim to public response bearing meaning and truth on the most serious and difficult questions, both personal and communal, that any human being or society must face: Has existence any ultimate meaning? Is a fundamental trust to be found amidst the fears, anxieties and terror of existence? Is there some reality, some force, even some one, who speaks a word of truth that can be recognized and trusted? Religions ask and respond to such fundamental questions of the meaning and truth © Grand Valley State University   �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 2 of 20 of our existence as human beings in solitude, and in society, history and the cosmos. Theologians, by definition, risk an intellectual life on the wager that religious traditions can be studied as authentic responses to just such questions. The nature of these fundamental questions cuts across the spectrum of publics. Lurking beneath the surface of our everyday lives, exploding into explicitness in the limit-situations inevitable in any life, are questions which logically must be and historically are called religious questions. To formulate such questions honestly and well, to respond to them with passion and rigor, is the work of all theology. (p. 4) With such a vision of theology’s work, Tracy sets out to create a space in human endeavor for such an undertaking. Claiming the common human experience of encountering a classic in the spectrum of human culture, Tracy points specifically to the classic in art which is universally recognized. He then claims the same holds true for the religious experience; there have been religious expressions that can rightfully be designated classic. As cited above, The issue of both the meaning and truth of religion is related to the analogous issue of the meaning and truth of art. For Tracy, a Christian theologian, the classic religious expression is the event of Jesus Christ. In Part I Tracy will develop his claim that a religious classic can be portrayed through reasoning that is publicly recognized – there can be no appeal to an external norm or private vision. This section he entitles “Publicness in Systematic Theology.” From there he will go on to apply what he has claimed to the event of Jesus Christ. Section Two he entitles, “Interpreting the Christian Classic.” The Preface announces the major question of Tracy’s The Analogical Imagination: “In a culture of pluralism must each religious tradition finally either dissolve into some lowest common denominator or accept a marginal existence as one interesting but purely private option?” Tracy is not willing to accept either option. A theological strategy must be found that can articulate the genuine claims of religion to truth. This is the task he sets for himself: a responsible affirmation of pluralism through the discovery of public criteria by which truth can be affirmed. Theology must develop public criteria of truth and discourse because it deals with the fundamental questions of existence and because it speaks of God. Recognizing that the theologian addresses three arenas, society, academy and church, Tracy insists that the criteria of publicness applies in all three areas. Theology is the generic name for three disciplines: fundamental, systematic and practical theologies. Publicness is demanded of each. The primary focus of fundamental theology is the academy, of systemic theology, the church and of © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 3 of 20 practical theology, society. They differ not only in their primary reference group, but also in terms of their modes of argument, ethical stance, religious stance and in terms of expressing claims to meaning and truth. On the way to a responsible pluralism all conversation partners must agree to certain basic rules for the discussion. Two constants are present: the interpretation of a religious tradition and the interpretation of the religious dimension of the contemporary situation from which and to which the theologian speaks. In regard to the first, it is incumbent upon the theologian to make explicit his or her general method of interpretation, to develop “criteria of appropriateness” whereby specific interpretations of the tradition may be judged by the wider theological community. In regard to the interpretation of the contemporary situation, there must be an analysis of the “religious” questions, the question of the meaning of human existence in the present situation. There are major differences as well. Tracy addresses the question as to what constitutes a public claim to truth in the three sub-disciplines of theology. Fundamental theology’s defining characteristic is “a reasoned insistence on employing the approach and methods of some established academic discipline to explicate and adjudicate the truth claims of the interpreted religious tradition and the truth claims of the contemporary situation.” (p. 62) Various models are available but whichever model is chosen fundamental questions and answers are articulated in such a way that any attentive, intelligent, reasonable and responsible person can understand and judge them in keeping with fully public criteria for argument. Personal faith may not enter the argument for the truth claims in fundamental theology. The systematic theologian’s major task is the reinterpretation of the tradition for the present situation. Where the fundamental theologian will relate the reality of God to our fundamental trust in existence (our common faith), the confessional systematic theologian will relate that reality to their arguments for a distinctively Christian understanding of faith. (p. 65) Christian theology…consists in explicating in public terms and in accordance with the demands of it own primary confessions, the full meaning and truth of the original “illuminating event”…which occasioned and continues to inform its understanding of all reality. (p. 66) Thus the task of the systematic theologian is an hermeneutical task. The “illuminating event” Tracy calls a religious classic. As in a classic work of art, the religious classic contains the possibility of ever new “disclosures.” Classics Tracy defines as texts, events, images, persons, rituals and symbols which are assumed to disclose permanent possibilities of meaning and truth. The hermeneutical theologian seeks to articulate the truth – disclosure of the reality of God embedded in the tradition for the contemporary situation. © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 4 of 20 There is today a strong case being made by many theologians for the necessity of any theological theory or argument yielding to the demand of praxis. Praxis…must be related to theory, not as theory’s application or even goal as in all conscious and unconscious mechanical notions of practice or technique. Rather praxis is theory’s own originating and self-correcting foundation, since all theory is dependent, minimally, on the authentic praxis of the theorist’s personally appropriated value of intellectual integrity and self-transcending commitment to the imperatives of critical rationality. (p. 69) Tracy states his response to the theologians of praxis as follows: The very notion of praxis is grounded in a distinction, not a separation; truth as transformation always also involves truth as disclosure; speaking the truth is never separable but is distinguishable from doing the truth; cognitive claims are not simply validated through authentic praxes any more than causes are validated through the presence of martyrs; the crises of cognitive claims does not simply dissipate when the shift of emphasis to the social-ethical crisis of a global humanity comes more clearly into central focus…. (p. 79) In sum: fundamental theology seeks metaphysical and existential adequacy to experience; systematic theology seeks the disclosure of the original “illuminating event” in the present situation; practical theology emphasizes the necessity of truth as transformative. Tracy hopes for the possibility of collaboration between these sub-disciplines and the communal recognition of the real need for all three. Tracy moves the focus now to systematic theology asking from the perspective of fundamental theology what one can argue on obviously public grounds for the public status of all good systematic theology. The question is simply, “Is systematic theology public discourse?” It is Tracy’s contention that systematic theology is hermeneutical. This means that systematic theology’s task is to interpret, mediate and translate the meaning and truth of the tradition. Where this is not the case, where the notion of authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for the obedient will, theologians can no longer interpret and translate the tradition but “only repeat the shop-worn conclusions of the tradition.” (p. 99) Eventually, the central, classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition become mere “fundamentals” to be externally accepted and endlessly repeated. (p. 99) Tracy points to the contrast of an hermeneutical theology: © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 5 of 20 The heart of any hermeneutical position is the recognition that all interpretation is a mediation of past and present, a translation carried on within the effective history of a tradition to retrieve its sometimes strange, sometimes familiar meanings. (p. 99) How is this done? Recognizing that one begins within a tradition which has shaped one, that one is socialized, acculturated and thus without the possibility of finding some position “above” one’s own historicity, …the route to liberation from the negative realities of a tradition is not to declare the existence of an autonomy that is literally unreal but to enter into a disciplined and responsive conversation with the subject matter – the responses and, above all, the fundamental questions – of the tradition. (p. 100) Tracy refers to Hans-Georg Gadamer’s model of conversation as a model for understanding the dialogue with the tradition. Real conversation occurs only when the participants allow the question, the subject matter, to assume primacy. It occurs only when our usual fears about our own self-image die….That fear dies only because we are carried along, and sometimes away, by the subject matter itself into the rare event or happening named “thinking” and “understanding.” For understanding happens; it occurs not as the pure result of personal achievement but in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation itself. (p. 101) …The word “hermeneutical” best describes this realized experience of understanding in conversation. For every event of understanding, in order to produce a new interpretation, mediates between our past experience and the understanding embodied in our linguistic tradition and the present event of understanding occasioned by a fidelity to the logic of the question in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation. (p. 101) Using the model of conversation Tracy shows how one enters into the history of the illuminating event. When interpreting a classic one recognizes its “excess of meaning” demands constant interpretation and is at the same time timeless – “a certain kind of timelessness –namely the timeliness of a classic expression radically rooted in its own historical time and calling to my own historicity. That is, the classical text is not in some timeless moment which needs mere repetition. Rather its kind of timelessness as permanent timeliness is the only one proper to any expression of the finite, temporal, historical beings we are….The classic text’s fate is that only its constant reinterpretation by later finite, historical, temporal beings who will risk asking its questions and listening, critically and tactfully, to its responses can actualize the event of understanding beyond its present fixation in a text. (p. 102) © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 6 of 20 To be understood a classic cannot be repeated; it must be interpreted. Thus Tracy claims All contemporary systematic theology can be understood as fundamentally hermeneutical. This position implies that systematic theologians, by definition, will understand themselves as radically finite and historical thinkers who have risked a trust in a particular religious tradition – They seek, therefore, to retrieve, interpret, translate, mediate the resources – …of the classic events of understanding of those fundamental religious questions embedded in the classic events, images, persons, rituals, texts and symbols of the tradition. (p. 104) Tracy moves on to the normative role of the classics. He begins with the assertion “classics exist.” It is true of all cultures. He claims, We all find ourselves compelled both to recognize and on occasion to articulate our reasons for recognition that certain expressions of the human spirit so disclose a compelling truth about our lives that we cannot deny them some kind of normative status. (p. 108) Such expressions we call “classic.” Tracy defines the classic thus: My thesis is that which we mean in naming certain texts, events, images, rituals, symbols and persons “classics” is that here we recognize nothing less than the disclosure of a reality we cannot but name truth….some disclosure of reality in a moment that must be called one of “recognition” which surprises, provokes, challenges, shocks and eventually transforms us; an experience that upsets conventional opinion and expands the sense of the possible; indeed a realized experience of that which is essential, that which endures. (p. 108) The experience of a classic work of art is used as an illustration of Tracy’s point. Citing Gadamer, he writes, The actual experience of the work of art can be called a realized experience of an event of truth ....when I experience any classic work of art, I do not experience myself as an autonomous subject aesthetically appreciating the good qualities of an aesthetic object set over against me. Indeed, when I reflect after the experience upon the experience itself, shorn of prior theories of "aesthetics," I find that my subjectivity is never in control of the experience, nor is the work of art actually experienced as an object with certain qualities over against me. Rather the work of art encounters me with the surprise, impact, even shock of reality itself. In experiencing art, I recognize a truth I somehow know but know I did not really know except through the experience of recognition of the essential compelled by the work of art. (p. 111F) © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 7 of 20 I am transformed by the truth which I encounter. I experience self-transcendence not as an achievement; rather it happens, it occurs. I am caught up in the disclosure of the work. Gadamer uses the phenomenon of the "game" to describe this encounter. In playing a game I lose myself in the play moving into the "rules" of the game. The game becomes not an object over against a self-conscious subject but an experienced relational and releasing mode of being in the world distinct from the ordinary, nonplayful one. In every game, I enter the world where I play so fully that finally the game plays me. (p. 114) This is what happens when one encounters a genuine work of art. One finds oneself in the grip of an event, a happening, a disclosure, a claim to truth which cannot be denied. Tracy notes the process of encountering the text. The first movement is the reception of the text. Secondly, if the text is a classic it will carry a force that will claim attention. The third step of interpretation involves the "game" spoken of above. The dialogue will demand that the interpreter enter into the back-andforth movement of that disclosure in the dialectics of a self-transcending freedom released by the text upon a finite, historical, dialogical reader and received by the text from a now dialoguing reader. (p. 120) The fourth step involves the larger conversation of the entire community of inquirers. To illustrate our claim that an encounter with a classic work of art demands our attention and discloses truth which we cannot but recognize as an encounter with reality, Tracy describes the production of a classic. The discussion of that creative artistic process leads him to conclude: In the paradigmatic expressions of the human spirit - in those texts, events, persons, actions, images, rituals, symbols which bear within them a classic as authoritative status, we find in our experienced recognition of their claim to attention the presence of what we cannot but name "truth." ... That truth is at once a disclosure and a concealment of what, at our best and most self-transcending in interpreting the classics, we cannot but name "reality." (p. 130) Tracy therefore argues for his contention that the systematic theologian is the interpreter of religious classics. Systematic theology intends to provide an interpretation, a retrieval (including a retrieval through critique and suspicion) and always, © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 8 of 20 therefore, a new application of a particular religious tradition’s selfunderstanding for the current horizon of the community. (p. 131) Applying this understanding of systematic theology’s task to the specific task of the Christian thinker, Tracy declares, In Christian systematics, that self-understanding is itself further grounded in the particular events and persons of Jewish and Christian history: decisively grounded, for the Christian, in God’s own self-manifestation as my God in this classic event and person, Jesus Christ. (p. 131) But now the crux of the matter is reached: how does the systematic theologian address the wider public with discussion characterized by “publicness” thus stopping the retreat of Christian faith into the sphere of privateness and yet remain faithful to the radical particularity of the relationship of my gift’s disclosure to the particular events of God’s action in ancient Israel, in Jesus of Nazareth, in the history of the Christian church? (p. 132) Acknowledging the dilemma, Tracy believes it can be overcome. The means of overcoming the dilemma is the recognition of the public nature of the classic: grounded in some realized experience of a claim to attention, unfolding as cognitive disclosures of both meaning and truth and ethically transformative of personal, social and historical life. (p. 132) Tracy therefore contends, Whenever any systematic theologian produces a classic interpretation of a particular classic religious tradition (as both Barth and Rahner have), then that new expression should be accorded a public status in the culture…. (p. 132F) Every classic…is a text, event, image, person or symbol which unites particularity of origin and expression with a disclosure of meaning and truth available, in principle, to all human beings. (p. 133) And again: Any person’s intensification of particularity via a struggle with the fundamental questions of existence in a particular tradition, if that struggle is somehow united to the logos of appropriate expression, will yield a form of aesthetically sharable public discourse. (p. 134) Chapter four deals with the interpretation of the religious classics. The classic, Tracy claims, has these two marks: permanence and excess of meaning. They © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 9 of 20 demand interpretation, never mere repetition nor simplistic rejection. The interpreter must plunge in, get caught up in the subject matter of the classic. Engaging a major classic or being engaged by it is to be engaged by the questions of the truth of existence. This is the task of the systematic theologian – to interpret the religious classics of a culture. While many in contemporary culture relegate religious questions to a primitive state of the race’s development, Tracy raises the question, Yet what if the authority of religion is not the authoritarianism in our impacted memories of “religion” but the authority of those authentic, indeed inevitable fundamental questions about the meaning of the whole codified in the questions and responses of classical religious texts, events, images, symbols, rituals and persons? (p. 155) To be sure, the religions have been purveyors not only of authentic truth but demonic destructive power. There is a great deal of conflict of interpretations on the meaning of religion and in the modern period the claims of Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche and Freud that describe religion as “projection” and “illusion” must be faced. Arriving at one definition for the essence of religion is not possible. Yet Tracy will not back off; he claims, The questions which religion addresses are the fundamental existential questions of the meaning and truth of individual, communal and historical existence as related to, indeed as both participating in and distanced from, what is sensed as the whole of reality. (p. 157F) Religion, Tracy argues, is not just another cultural perspective alongside morality, art, science, commerce and politics. In its own self-understanding, a religious perspective claims to speak not of a part but of the whole. (p. 159) In a very technical philosophical argument Tracy maintains An ability to partly state – more exactly, to metaphysically state – the abstract, general, universal and necessary features of the reality of God as the one necessary existent which can account for the reality of a limit-of, ground-to, horizon-to the whole disclosed in earlier phenomenological accounts. (p. 161) Religion has essential characteristics even apart from a single definition of its essence and chief among them, Tracy claims, is "a limit-character." There is both a "limit-to" dimension: a dimension present in the "limit-questions" of scientific inquiry and moral striving, and in those experiences (either negative, like anxiety as © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 10 of 20 distinct from fear, or positive, like fundamental trust, wonder and loyalty as distinct from trust in and fidelity to a particular cause), disclosive of the "limit-situation" which is the human situation. (p. 160) and a "limit of" dimension: The philosophical analyses of fundamental theology, therefore, free the inquirer to study the possible meanings of such recognized "situational" limit-experiences as finitude, contingency, mortality, alienation or oppression and thereby to explicate, indeed to state, the character of that reality as a limit-to our existence. In that explicit stating of a limit-to, the inquirer may also be able to disclose or show the existence of a reality here named a "limit-of" (alternatively horizon-to our ground-of). In its metaphysical or transcendental form, the analysis can also partly state the character of that reality of the limit-of. This is the case, in the Western tradition, when the metaphysical reality of God as the one necessary existent grounding all reality is explicated as the referent of just such limit-experiences of a religious dimension to our lives", (p. 160) Tracy uses Karl Rahner's work to illustrate how this philosophical analysis of fundamental theology relates to the Christian conviction of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. For Rahner, the philosopher of religion can provide persuasive philosophical arguments for the necessary existence of an absolute mystery as ultimate horizon to all thinking and living. If that argument holds, then Rahner is correct to insist that the human being, now understood as always already within that horizon of ultimate mystery, can be redescribed, in his now famous phrase, as a hearer of a possible revelation from this horizon, i.e., a self-manifestation by the power of ultimate mystery itself. In the actual experience of that self-manifestation of God in Jesus Christ, the Christian believer now, according to Rahner, recognizes that the concrete revelation is a pure gift or grace from the incomprehensible God of Love. Then the believer "recognizes" that all reality is graced by that gift: that all reality partakes in a "transcendental" revelation disclosed in the categorical revelation of God's own self-manifestation in Jesus Christ; that revelation, as "transcendental," is always already present in this concretely graced world; that revelation as "categorized" is present in the gratuity of God's self-manifestation in the events of "salvation history," decisively present, for Rahner, in the event of the manifestation of who God is and who we are in Jesus Christ. (p. 162) Thus we are hearers of a possible revelation or self-manifestation of the absolute mystery and for the Christian believer that manifestation has taken concrete shape in Jesus Christ. In these terms the religious classic © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 11 of 20 may be viewed as an event of disclosure, expressive of the "limit-of," "horizon-to," "ground-to" side of "religion." ... religious classic expressions will involve a claim to truth as the event of a disclosure – concealment of the whole of reality by the power of the whole – as, in some sense, a radical and finally gracious mystery. (p. 163) An experience of such a classic religious expression will carry an authority which will give to the religious person the conviction that their values, their style of life, their ethos are in fact grounded in the inherent structure of reality itself. (p. 163) Tracy summarizes his contention in this discussion of the interpretation of the religious classic as follows: First, a defining characteristic of the situational "religious dimension of common experience and language" is the "limit-to" character of the experience itself, whatever its particular existential focus. Second, a defining characteristic of any explicit religion – more exactly any classic religious expression – is a “limit-of” character bearing the status of eventgift-manifestation of and from the whole, and experienced as giving the respondent wholeness. (p. 165) His approach in pursuing this line of argument – that the religious classic exists, claims our attention and discloses truth which we cannot but name reality – presumes an appropriate preunderstanding for the interpretation of religion. He argues: If one is guided by a sense for those fundamental questions, if guided as well by that great modern tradition of interpretation of the sui generis character of religion ... The interpreter is likely to find relative adequacy in the kind of interpretations of the appropriate responses to the religious classics described in different, sometimes conflicting ways by these great modern phenomenologists of the sui generis character of religion. (p. 168) ... The kind of claim to attention that a religious classic, as religious, provokes is a claim that discloses to the interpreter some realized experience bearing some sense of recognition into the objectively awesome reality of the otherness of the whole as radical mystery. The genuinely religious person (James' "mystics" and "saints"), it seems, do experience that reality of mystery as the reality of the holy bearing overwhelming and life-transformative force, (p. 168F) The religious person speaks of revelation, the self-manifestation of an undeniable power not one's own or at one's disposal. They cannot but acknowledge the eruption of a power manifesting itself – a power of the whole revealing the whole. © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 12 of 20 For the whole experienced as radical mystery is experienced as giving itself in the religious response. The whole, in manifesting itself, is also experienced as freeing the real self of the respondent to its true freedom; a freedom where the self's new ethos is experienced as grounded in reality itself – a reality both disclosed and concealed as the whole by the power of the whole. (p. 175) Again Tracy explains the experience thus: The same sense of radical giftedness both fascinates and frightens as it shocks and transforms the self to believe what one dare not otherwise believe: that reality is finally gracious, that the deepest longings of our minds and hearts for wholeness in ourselves, with others, with history and nature, is the case – the case granted as gift by the whole; the case expressed with relative adequacy determined by the intrinsic inadequacy of every classic religious expression. (p. 177) We approach now the heart of Tracy’s argument as he discusses the religious classic under the sub-divisions of manifestation and proclamation. Here he makes a creative and passionate appeal for a genuinely ecumenically Christian witness which brings together the strengths of the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions rather than the more narrow focus of any single tradition. Tracy's argument rests on his contention that truth becomes a realized experience through the encounter with a religious classic. A classic expression encountered frees oneself from the ordinary attempts to distance the self from any claims that cannot be controlled as objects over against its own subjectivity. ... The interpreter of religious classics may admit that this classic testimony bears a claim to truth. That claim is, more exactly, a nonviolent appeal to the instinct of the human spirit for some relationship to the whole. (p. 194) The truth experienced in the classic has the character of event. When technical rationality reigns, no recognition of the event-character of truth can occur. Any interpreter of the religious classic must early decide whether to impose some standards of technical rationality upon all classical expressions or risk exposing oneself to another mode of rationality; a mode proper to the thing itself as it discloses itself to consciousness. We cannot, in fact, verify or disprove the claims of classical religious expressions through empiricist methods….truth here becomes a manifestation that lets whatever shows itself to be in its showing and its hiddenness. (p. 195) Neither the Enlightenment model of rationality nor traditionalist models of heteronomy are capable of dealing thus with truth as event, occurrence. They © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 13 of 20 both interpret all claims to truth through the restrictive lenses of techniques developed by autonomous and heteronomous interpreters. Just as one approaches a classic in any field, so in religion one must be open to being caught up in the "conversation," the "game," open to being transformed by the truth of the whole which finds expression or which discloses itself through the concrete religious expression. Fundamental theology warrants the claims to truth of the religious dimension to existence on ordinary public grounds; systematic theology as interpretation warrants the claims to truth of a concrete religion on those kinds of authentically public grounds appropriate to the kind of disclosive publicness expressed in all classics. This is the case, moreover, for radically experiential reasons: the realized experience of the truth-character of the religious classic is an experience of its purely given character, its status as an event, a happening manifested to my experience, neither determined by nor produced by my subjectivity. (p. 198) Tracy describes the structural similarity between the encounter with religious classics and other classics. Any classic will produce its meaning through the related strategies of intensification of particularity and intensification of distanciation in expression. The first journey of intensification into one's own particularity will ordinarily free the person (or community) from the limitations of selfconsciousness into a sense of a real participation in, a belonging to, a wider and deeper reality than the self or the community. That experience of intensification, like all experience must involve some understanding and some expression. When the struggle for expression – the second, selfdistancing journey of intensification – finds its appropriate genre, style and form, then the self is positively distanced from the original experience in order to express the meaning of that experience. Then a person can communicate the disclosive meaning to others who may not now share it, but can share its meaning through experiencing the now-rendered expression. (p. 199F) There is a difference between religious classics and other classics, however. It has to do with intensity. The religious classic is an expression of the whole itself by the power of the whole. ... The authentically religious impetus is one where the intensification process is itself abandoned into a letting go of one's own efforts at intensity. One lets go because one has experienced some disclosure of the whole which cannot be denied as from the whole. (p. 201) © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 14 of 20 Finally one experiences a sense of resting in the radical and gracious mystery at the heart of human existence. Such an experience demands expression: a demand to express that experience and its meaning and truth in a form – a text, an image, a gesture, above all, a style of life. The demand to express, to render, to communicate sets in motion the distanciation process whereby the self distances itself from its own self-consciousness and finds the proper genre for some expression of that meaning and truth. (p. 201) Summarizing the process, Tracy claims, Both the expression and the experience of a religious "limit-of" disclosure and concealment of and by the whole remains, therefore, intrinsically dialectical throughout the entire process. The demands of the journey of intensification into the fundamental questions of the meaning of existence imply their opposite: a letting-go, a being-caught-up-in, a radical belonging-to some disclosure of the whole by the whole. And the very radicality of that belonging-to the whole posits itself by implying its opposite: I as a self recognize that I am absolutely dependent upon the whole, recognize myself as in actuality profoundly ambiguous in all my experience, my understanding, my ability and willingness to live by and in the radical mystery which envelops and empowers me. As the dialectic intensifies, this recognition of the disclosure of radical mystery posits itself as disclosure by implying its opposite: The mystery is also concealed from me by and in its disclosure as mystery. The revelation is also a revelation of hiddenness; the flooding, white light of its comprehensibility frees me to recognize the dark impenetrable incomprehensibility of both the whole and myself in the whole. (p. 202) Then comes the command to communicate by incarnating that reality in a word, a symbol, an image, a ritual, a gesture, a life. Tracy moves now to discuss the classical forms of religious expression: manifestation and proclamation. The dialectical process just described, an existential intensification of particularity, expressing itself through distanciation in a sharable form – will operate dialectically at every moment in the process. (p. 203) But now Tracy makes another proposal regarding religious expression. When the dialectic of intensification of particularity releasing itself to a radical sense of participation predominates, the religious expression will be named "manifestation;" when the dialectic of intensification of particularity releasing itself to a sense of radical nonparticipation dominates, the religious expression will be named "proclamation." (p. 203) © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 15 of 20 The words "sacrament" and "word" are usually used to make this distinction, the former being the predominate expression of the Catholic and Orthodox traditions, while the latter has been characteristic of Protestantism. The difference is also pointed out by the terms "mystical-priestly-metaphysicalaesthetic" and "prophetic-ethical-historical." Both types are found in the Hebrew Scriptures and in the Christian tradition. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam contain both expressions although from the East they may appear more in the proclamatory mode. Likewise, although the Eastern religions are thought of as mainly in the mode of manifestation, they too must be understood in the dialectic of manifestation or proclamation. Tracy moves away from the common theological designation of the difference – word and sacrament – and uses instead the terminology of Paul Ricoeur – manifestation and proclamation – in order to see more clearly how the religious live in this dialectic and cannot be placed on one side or the other, although, of course, they lean to one pole or the other. He contends that the manifestation-proclamation dialectic is fruitful for understanding the complexity and the conflicts in Christian self-understanding, which is the focus of Tracy's work. This distinction provides the main rubric for the thought experiment Tracy is setting forth. Tracy argues that the very positing of manifestation or proclamation implies the other; each needs the other. He begins his examination of these poles with a discussion of manifestation. He uses the work of Mircea Eliade as the clearest example of religious expression as manifestation. ... Eliade' s classic achievement ... paradoxically serves a prophetic religious role to challenge the dominant prophetic, ethical, historical trajectory of Western religion in favor of its grounds in the power of manifestation.... The "archaic" ontology articulated by Eliade becomes the focal meaning for understanding religion as an eruption of power of some manifestation of the whole now experienced as the sacred cosmos. … By entering the ritual, by retelling the myth, even by creatively reinterpreting the symbol, we escape from the "nightmare" of history and even the "terror" of ordinary time. We finally enter true time, the time of the repetition of the actions of the whole at origin of the cosmos. In illo tempore, the power from the whole was first disclosed as sacred. ... only by entering into the originally nonlinguistic manifestations of power of the sacred in the ritual, the symbol, the festival, the myth, can we participate in, belong to, a realm disclosed in the other side of the ordinary: a realm which has manifested itself as sacred, which exposes the ordinary as profane, a realm which at the same time chooses any ordinary reality – this rock, this tree, this city, this mountain, this rite – as the medium for the saturated power of the sacred – the "center of the world." ... (p. 205F) © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 16 of 20 Thus the realm of the sacred can be experienced by being willing to enter the purely given, that sheer event of manifestation. Tracy maintains that Eliade has effectively challenged the Western Augustinian assumptions through his retrieval of the genius of Eastern Christianity: a theology oriented to and from, not history and ethos, but the cosmos and aesthetics; a style of religious practice oriented not so much by the word of scripture as by the manifestations of the sacred in image, icon, ritual, logos and cosmological theologies; a way of being Christian that both demands a radical separation from the ordinary via the rituals and myths of the repetition of the origins of the cosmos and allows real participation in the manifestations of the sacred available to our "divinized" humanity. (p. 208) But there is another pole; the pole of proclamation: Those religious expressions where the power of a word of proclamation from God in an address to an ambiguous self occurs as the paradigmatic disclosure of religious reality. (p. 208) The pole of manifestation brings to expression the sense of participation in the whole. Yet the very sense of identity in the moment of manifestation implies the non-identity of the individual, finite self. Therefore the estranged self may be addressed by a word of proclamation: A word of defamiliarizing proclamation now experienced by the self as the transcendent, unnamable Other which has now disclosed itself in word as like a who: the self of God. ... This God speaks a word of proclamation whereby and wherein the whole discloses itself in a new manifestation by the presence of a personal, gracious, acting, judging, proclaiming God. This God acts in the word-events of ordinary history and time. (p. 209) This word shatters our sense of participation, disconfirming any complacency in participation. To shatter any illusions that this culture, this priesthood, this land, this ritual is enough, to defamiliarize us with ourselves and with nature, to decode our encoded myths, to inflict its passionate negations upon all our pretensions, to suspect even our nostalgic longings for the sacred cosmos, to expose all idols of the self as projections of our selves and our mad ambitions, to expose all culture as contingent, even arbitrary. …To make us recognize that Judaism and Christianity disclose a radical worldaffirmation only because they have first undergone a radical, decentering experience of world-negation in the kerygmatic, proclamatory word of address of prophetic religion. (p. 209) … © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 17 of 20 The self finds that the response to that proclamation by the self and the people to whom the self belongs is that radical paradigmatic response of trust and obedience called faith. (p. 209) The proclaimed word will be expressed in the realm of the secular which was formerly thought of as profane but now is recognized as the arena in which the power of the word must be heard. ... The very power of the proclaimed word – a word addressed by God to both a community and a self, a word of address shattering their security and their idols – demands that the major expression of one's religious experience now be found in fidelity through word and deed in this time and this history to the God who gives that word as enabling command. (p. 210) The paradigm of proclamation does not eliminate the religious expressions of manifestation. Without them there is no place for the word to be heard and do its work. Yet the focus has definitely shifted. The language of radical participation in the religions of manifestation will now seem extravagant, sometimes even idolatrous. The rejection of the ordinary as the separated profane will now, in the proclamation of the word about the extraordinariness of the ordinary as the central expression of God's word and action, will now itself be rejected in favor of a classical, paradigmatic religious ethic of the secular. (p. 211) The affirmation of the secular in contemporary Jewish and Christian theology, therefore, is not properly understood as some collapse of Christianity and Judaism in the face of contemporary secularism. Rather a secular Christianity and a secular Judaism are, in fact, faithful to the paradigmatic eruption of a proclaimed and addressing word-event which founds these traditions and drives them on as their religious focal meaning. Some desacralization of the claims of participation via manifestation must occur whenever this kind of world-shattering and world-affirming paradigmatic religious experience of proclamation happens. For the very proclamation which affirms time and history and demands expression in and for ordinary time and history frees Jews and Christians in and for the world. When the paradigmatic religious power of that word has become a nostalgic echo, a presupposition that is no longer an impulse, then the great danger of a merely secularist Judaism, a merely secularist Christianity, a finally secularist culture emerges. (p. 211F) But where the proclaimed word is remembered, the word of world-negation and world-affirmation, the Jew and the Christian are freed for the world. This was the case in the Reformation according to Tracy. He calls it a classic religious event. The Reformation was a response to the graced freedom of the Christian before God's Word in Jesus Christ. © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 18 of 20 Where the paradigmatic power of that word saturates the religious consciousness with its power, then the negation of all over-claims to participation, the religious negation of the focus of "magic," "superstition," "legalism," and "ritualism" will burst upon any complacent resting in any religion of manifestation, any non-dialectical solace in a too easy humanism or any hardened priestcraft. (p. 212) The word exposes the world's real ambiguity, its possibilities for both good and evil and it points to a new time, a time of genuine newness, not just the repetition of the origins of the cosmos. If liberal Christianity loses its sense of the word of proclamation it loses its religious vitality. It loses its religious dialectic of the world and the secular and becomes another decent, ethical vision living in, by and for a world which sets its agenda and writes the words for its decent, ethical, but ultimately irreligious tunes. The liberal churches are always in danger of losing their paradigmatic religious dialectic and becoming only psychological counseling centers or resources for societal causes. And yet the fidelity of the liberal churches to the world empowered by their listening to the Christian word of proclamation compels them, as it must, to aid all authentic causes of personal wholeness and societal justice. (p. 212) Tracy points to Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer as leading examples of the ministry of the paradigmatic word which shatters the idols of culture. Barth so feared any claim to participation in the transcendent reality that he wanted to admit of no point of contact; such a view sees a word-centered Christianity devoid of all manifestation apart from the erupting power of the Word. Commenting on the two poles, manifestation and proclamation in their recent exponants referred to here, Eliade, Barth and Bonhoeffer, Tracy declares, With the same kind of radicality as Eliade, Barth and Bonhoeffer will also insist, "Only the paradigmatic is the real." Yet their paradigm of the proclaimed word will drive them into a direct confrontation with the equally radical "only" of Eliade through its dialectic in and for the world, in and for time and history. For Eliade, manifestation discloses not an entry into the secular but an escape from the terror, the nightmare, the banality, the latent nihilism of ordinary time and history. Not the profane, not the secular will save us; only an entry into the religion of manifestation, the worlds of sacred space and the repetitions of sacred time can do that. Eliade's work serves in the contemporary period as a classic expression of the power of religion as manifestation releasing its dialectic of the sacred and the profane and its passionately religious sense of radical participation in the cosmos through the saturating repetitions of myth, ritual and symbol. His is recognizably iconic consciousness. In an analogous manner Barth and Bonhoeffer, with their distinct and sometimes conflicting positions, represent two contemporary classic expressions of Christian © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 19 of 20 faith as a faith living by the power of the proclaimed word releasing its dialectic of the word and the secular and its suspicion of "religious participation" and repetition. (p. 213F) It is Tracy's contention that we must not be forced to choose one pole or the other. Christianity does not live by the "only" of Eliade or Barth. It is his purpose to push beyond these oppositions to find a place where both can be embraced. Both manifestation and proclamation are necessary to Christian religion. The dialectic of the Christian religion is one in which the word does negate any claim to a mode of participation which logically approaches identity or existentially relaxes into complacency – a dialectic which, in fidelity to the word, must radically negate all idolatries, yet a dialectic which implies, includes and demands genuine manifestation. ... Christianity embraces nature in and through its doctrines of creation – transformed, to be sure, in the light of the doctrines of redemption and future eschatology. Indeed Christianity celebrates nature in and through its doctrine of incarnation as theophanous manifestation – understood, to be sure, only in the light of a shattering, defamiliarizing cross and a transformative resurrection. (p. 214) Tracy contends that a Christianity of word without real manifestation stands in peril of becoming either fanatical or arid and cerebral and abstract. Barth understood this dealing at length with the doctrine of creation. Manifestation, Tracy argues, is always the enveloping presupposition of the erupting word of proclamation. Manifestation envelops every word from beginning to end, even as it allows itself to be transformed by the shattering paradigmatic power of the proclaimed word. But manifestation returns, thus transformed, to reunite even the secular, the historical, the temporal, the self with the whole disclosed in nature and the cosmos. A Christianity without a sense of radical participation in the whole – that sense which Schleiermacher named the "feeling of absolute dependence," which others name a fundamental trust in the very worthwhileness of existence – is a Christianity that has lost its roots in the human experience of God's manifesting and revealing presence in all creation, in body, in nature, in spirit, not only in history. (p. 215) The powerful, eruptive word of proclamation that defamiliarizes us from the world is yet itself rooted in the enveloping cosmos. To speak Christian eschatological language is to speak a language where the religious power of the whole has entered time and history in the decisive proclamation of this particular word and event, where that power has freed the "profane" to become the "secular" and has liberated the present and the future from the exclusive hold of the sacred time of past © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 20 of 20 origin by empowering history and ethical action with religious power. (p. 216) Tracy points to the sacramental view of Catholic Christianity: Nature and the secular become sacrament in their transformationsublation by the word, the "prime sacrament" and decisive manifestation or representation named Jesus Christ. There can be no negation of the cosmos or nature. Indeed a sacrament is nothing other than a decisive representation of both the events of proclaimed history and the manifestations of the sacred cosmos. (p. 216) If the kerygmatic power of the word in the sacrament is lost, the sacrament becomes magic. But if the paradigmatic power of real manifestation is lost, the word alone will not meet the deepest needs and satisfy the deepest longings of the human heart. Christianity then becomes a righteous rigorism of duty and obligation. How can we hold on to both poles and not lose the necessary experience of either manifestation or proclamation? Tracy believes it can be accomplished but only a radically ecumenical Christianity can accomplish it. By themselves, Protestant, Orthodox and Catholic Christianity seem trapped in historically hardened emphases: unable alone to restore the power of both proclamation and manifestation in a manner that does not seem some uneasy compromise. ... This demand for both manifestation and proclamation is incumbent upon all Christians who recognize the reality of Jesus Christ as the Christian classic, i.e., as the decisive representation in both word and manifestation of our God and our humanity. Thus will Christocentric Christians recognize that the paradigmatic Christ event discloses the religious power of both manifestation and proclamation ... both Christian manifestation and proclamation are ultimately rooted in that God whose radical otherness in freedom posits itself to us as the radical immanence of an all-pervasive, defamiliarizing, shattering, enveloping love in cosmos, in history, in the self. (p. 218) Part II: Interpreting the Christian Classic Tracy applies the methodological argument of Part I to a distinctively Christian systematic theology in Part II. He has argued that there is a distinctly religious classic among the other classics generally recognized and he contends that that classic status means that the religious classic too has public status. Such religious classics are “expressions from a particular tradition that have found the right mode of expression to become public for all intelligent, reasonable and responsible persons.” (p. 233). He asks then what are the classic texts, events, symbols, images and persons in a tradition. While in the Christian tradition there © Grand Valley State University �David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 21 of 20 are several candidates for classic status, there is one which is the norm of all others and which provides the focus for understanding God, self, others, society, history, nature and the whole from a Christian perspective: the event and person of Jesus Christ. Tracy claims, One need not be a believer in Christianity to accord it (and thereby its central, paradigmatic, classic event) authentically religious status: a manifestation from the whole by the power of the whole. (p. 234) Christology is the attempt to respond through some interpretation to the event of Jesus Christ in one’s own situation. …The Christian interpretation of this classic event recognizes in some present experience of the event – more precisely, in the claim disclosed in that event (paradigmatically in experiencing that event in manifestation and proclamation) as an event from God and by God’s power. To speak religiously and theologically of the Christ event is ultimately to speak of an event from God. )p. 234) The Jesus remembered by the tradition is experienced in the present mediated through the word, sacrament and action. Jesus remembered as the Christ is the experience of the presence of God’s own self. The expression “The event of Jesus Christ” means for the Christian tradition…that we recognize Jesus in the Christ event as the person in whom God’s own self is decisively re-presented as the gift and command of love. The always already reality of a graced world is made present again decisively, paradigmatically, classically as event in Jesus Christ. The event, as re-presentative of reality always already present to us as human beings, is present again as the decisive that it happens. The event as command is also present as the not-yet-actualized reality internal for each person and for all history responding to that one decisive event of God. (p. 234) Tracy will now examine this position to see if it is a relatively adequate interpretation of the event and, secondly, to understand how this interpretation differs from alternative interpretations. The key for the interpretation of the event of Jesus Christ must be the claim exerted in the present by that event as the claim that it happens now. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, 1998 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19980101 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1998-01-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1998 entitled "The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism ", on the book The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism , written by David Tracy. Tags: Theology, Pluralism, Truth, Meaning, Sacred, Religious Tradition, Nature of God, Nature of Religion, Ecumenical, Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Mircea Eliade, David Tracy. Scripture references: David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, 1998. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf David Tracy Dietrich Bonhoeffer Ecumenical Karl Barth Meaning Mircea Eliade Nature of God Nature of Religion Pluralism Religious Tradition Sacred Theology Truth https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2e77299cfd9d97c25c0133fb43b0b169.pdf fb2dd89eada85e918d593461a9395bdd PDF Text Text   Jesus and the Other Names: Christian Mission and Global Responsibility By Paul F. Knitter (Orbis Books, 1996) Review By Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Publication of Review Unknown In his foreword to Jesus and the Other Names, Harvey Cox speaks of “two urgent movements” in Christian theology which “shook him to his roots”, requiring him to completely rethink his theology. The first, impacting him in the 60’s, was liberation theology. The second, a decade later, was the persistent question of a Christian response to other faiths. For too long he felt that those two movements were like two separate conversations. Those interested in the one concern, had little interest in the other. Paul Knitter, he suggests, has found a way to blend the two conversations – conversations concerning the religious other and the suffering other. Jesus and the Other Names focuses Christian theology on the issue of “globally responsible, correlational dialogue among religions”. His discussion bears the hall marks of the classic liberal persuasion, as do the discussions of John Hick in The Metaphor of God Incarnate and S. Wesley Ariarajah in The Bible and People of Other Faiths. And like them, he draws heavily upon his own human experience. This I believe has always been the strength of the liberal position. Paul Knitter knows the discussion of Christian mission in a pluralistic society from both ends of a spectrum. In the late 50’s after four years of Catholic seminary high school, he officially joined the ranks of the Divine Word Missionaries (“SVD” or Societas Vergi Divini). Those were the years of missionary “adaptation” and “accommodation” in Catholic circles. Missionaries on furlough were often invited to speak to the novitiates. Knitter was struck by the time spent in speaking appreciatively of the other faiths and other ways encountered on the mission field. Such appreciation and accommodation disturbed the ardent young Knitter. Yet by the time of his college graduation in 1962 it was becoming clearer, “that the old exclusivist model of Christianity as light and other religions as darkness didn’t fit the facts” (p. 5). What to do with that dawning realization became clearer to Knitter at the Pontifical Gregorian University. He arrived just two weeks before the opening of © Grand Valley State University   �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 2   the Second Vatican Council. There Knitter took a course from Catholic theologian Karl Rahner, who was a visiting professor at the time. He was deeply impressed by Rahner’s concept that even those individuals who did not know or profess Christ, even those followers of another religious persuasion, were nonetheless saved by Christ’s sacrificial death. Thus they were, without at times even being aware of it, “anonymous Christians”. Knitter chose to write his doctorate under Rahner on the theme of Catholic attitudes towards other religions. A year and a half later, to his “devastating surprise” he discovered that someone else had not only chosen the same dissertation topic, but had published it that year in Rome. It was this which prompted Knitter to apply to Marburg University (and was the first Roman Catholic ever admitted to the Protestant Marburg), in order to pursue the topic of a Protestant theology or religions. Though he must admit to a biased Rahnerian Catholic perspective, Knitter does not deny the validity of his conclusion: In their efforts to recognize the value of other religions, Protestant theologians, I claimed, were stymied by the Reformational insistence on “faith alone” through “Christ alone” (see Knitter 1975). Protestants such as Paul Althaus, Emil Brunner, and even Wolhart Pannenberg, could recognize “revelation” in other faiths, but never “salvation.” This was, I concluded, to go only halfway in their efforts to reach out to other religious believers (p. 7). This move towards an “inclusive” understanding would ultimately be but a bridge to “the other side” - where lay a more pluralistic understanding of world religions. To move across this bridge he found he must sublate a christocentric approach with one that was theocentric. Thus in his book No Other Name (1985) he would claim “the possibility (and nothing more) that other religions may have their own valid views of and responses to” (p. 9) the Divine Mystery we call Theos or God. Now in Jesus and the Other Names he attempts to correct some of his earlier conclusions (seeing a need to emphasize the soteriological issues rather than theocentric), as he continues to move in the direction of pluralism. In the midst of his wrestling with “the religious other”, Knitter, like Cox, was impacted by the issues of “the suffering other”. Becoming involved with the Sanctuary Movement, he entered into discussion with those for whom suffering takes precedence over doctrinal disputes. He found himself increasingly aware, along with friend and colleague Hans Küng, that as religious persons we bear responsibility for a global ethic. Inter-religious dialogue becomes not simply a question of how to discern God, but even more urgently the question of how to bring about God’s reign. ...the avalanche of dangers forming on the slopes of economic injustice, environmental devastation, and military build-up will not be stayed unless the nations of the world come together to formulate and endorse some kind of shared ethical convictions and guidelines. But such a task will not © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 3   be accomplished unless the religions of the world, in dialogue, make their contribution. In other words, inter religious conversations must make their most pressing agenda the ethical issues behind the mounting suffering of humans and Earth (p. 12). Having described the autobiographical journey which led him to a pluralistic (he prefers the word correlational to pluralistic) perspective, Knitter turns to the theological underpinnings which support such a view. He suggests that all of our theological understandings must be defined and shaped both by human experience and Christian tradition. Human experience has some common aspects Knitter believes, at least in Western cultures. Whether interacting with co-workers, gathered socially around a dinner table, attending our children’s school programs, or sharing a marriage bed, we are becoming more intimately and acutely aware that there are others for whom another faith persuasion has enriched and transformed their lives. To suggest that ours is the only possibility for grasping religious truth is no longer possible. Pluralism, whether we advocate it or not, is a cognitive reality for most of the Western world. Thus awareness of “others” is one aspect of our human experience. A second is a historical consciousness that recognizes the limitations of knowledge. Says Knitter, “There is no such thing, we know today, as factual knowledge; it is always interpreted knowledge” (p. 29). He quotes Langdon Gilkey: ...in order to preserve their integrity, they must accept theologically what they have long accepted culturally. Given the context-conditioned, “theory-laden”, socially constructed interpretative limitations of every grasp and statement of truth, and given also the ever-changing, always confining flow of history, Christians (and all religious persons) have to admit honestly that, within our human condition, there can be no final word, no one way of knowing truth that is valid for all times and all peoples (pp. 29-30). George Lindbeck (The Nature of Doctrine, 1984) and David Tracy (The Analogical Imagination, 1981 and Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987) are also cited: (They) remind their fellow Christians that to think that they have a fixed source of truth, an unchanging criterion they can apply in all cultural situations in order to decide what is true or good, a foundation that transcends the process and pluralism of history, is to fly in the face of reality, to lust after the unreal. There is no fixed place of truth outside the fray of historical process and continuous dialogue...which means that Christianity is one of the many, limited religions of the world (p. 30). © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 4   A third component which supports a pluralistic or correlational theology is the moral imperative. Knitter insists that we cannot know our own truth except in dialogue with others. To know only one religion is to risk that it will tend toward a “barbarous or self-indulgent abuse of our own truth” (p. 32). Humorously, Knitter suggests that, just as we need someone to tell us when we have bad breath (!), we need the dialogue partner, the other perspective, to open our eyes - to enable us to see not only how others see our “truth” and also how it affects them, which is perhaps even more important. And finally, human experience recognizes our responsibility for the welfare of the world. Knitter believes that we have a moral obligation, bequeathed to us by God, to participate in the coming of the reign of God. We are God’s physical hands and heart in this world and thus are obligated to aide in the Divine work of Shalom. Aspects of the Christian tradition which support a correlational dialogue are again four in Knitters listing. First, says Knitter, the traditional understanding of the nature of God requires such a pluralistic posture. God is beyond our comprehension. Hence, to say that we have a final or exclusive understanding of the Mystery that is Theos is idolatrous. Moreover, Knitter contends that our understanding of God as Trinitarian implies plurality. Christian ethical incentives provide a basis as well, he claims. Here he relies almost exclusively on the commandment which calls us to love our neighbor as God loves us. To exclude our neighbor from salvation seems to Knitter the epitome of inhospitableness and lack of love. Whenever we hold up a truth or a revelation and insist that according to the will of God it is the only or the absolutely final norm in which all others have to be included, then we cannot treat them as our brothers and sisters in God. Such a norm does enable us to confront them, as love sometimes requires, but it does not allow us to be confronted by them, as love also requires. Whenever we are not disposed to learn as much from our neighbors as they can from us, we cannot love them. We may help them, we may build hospitals and schools for them, we may lift them from their poverty - but we are not loving them (p. 39). Pastoral concerns must be honored in conjunction with supports of the Christian tradition. We do a disservice to those who struggle with these questions if we simply cite doctrine and creed as final answers. We must wrestle along with them in order to give satisfaction to their “cry from the heart”. And then there are the scriptural incentives for correlational dialogue. Along with Krister Stendhal and John Hick, Knitter suggests that we must understand much of the biblical language as metaphor. The grand and divine appellations are really “love talk” (Stendahl). And while he wants to honor and respect texts such as Acts 4:12 – “There is no other name given to human kind by which we can be saved than the name of Jesus Christ”, he begs we remember the context (these © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 5   words for example are spoken in connection with a specific healing), as well as the polemic nature of other passages such as “I am the way the truth and the life...”. We must always distinguish between the universal and the particular, says Knitter, citing Schubert Ogden’s understanding that we must locate “the particularity of Jesus within the universality of God’s self-revelation, rather than locating God’s universality within the particularity of the historical Jesus”(p. 42). It is that understanding of universality that drives us towards correlational dialogue. Why the term “correlational”? Here Knitter honestly admits that inter-faith dialogue is not easy. He takes issue with those who suggest that we come together easily around issues of “common essence” or “common experience”. Such suggestions are “gossamer theories spun out by academicians who most likely have never felt the hard, obstructing reality of otherness” (p. 13). And yet, his actual inter-faith dialogue experience has convinced him that, despite what are often chasms of perspective, there remains a relatedness. This, he trusts, is a sign from God to persistently pursue areas of “correlation”, and those ways in which we can go forward together in the global work of peace and justice. In the face of his critics’ real and valid concerns ( 1 - that the ambiguity of pluralism jeopardizes a firm foundation of meaning and purpose, 2 - the difficulties of prophetically resisting evil in Christ’s name, 3 - the corrosion and possible destruction of missionary outreach), Knitter maintains that he is still able to conceive of Jesus as unique for Christians and for the world. Stressing ortho-praxis (doing as he did) rather than orthodoxy, Knitter claims that Jesus is truly & fully all that the Newer Testament witnesses profess that he was. Yet this does not require that he was the only one, who solely embodied the selfrevelation of God. Whatever it is that brings a person to be a Christian and follower of Jesus, by its very nature it must enable the person to say that Jesus is truly and effectively the vehicle of the Divine Presence in his or her life. For this person Jesus is truly the Son of God, the savior, mediator, word of God, messiah, the living one. Without the feeling - without an experiential awareness - that inspires the “truly,” one cannot be, one would not want to be, a Christian. But I don’t think that is true of “solely.” When one knows that Jesus is truly savior, one does not know that he is the only savior. One’s experience is limited and has not been able to take in the experiences and messages of all other so-called saviors or religious figures. But if Christians do not or cannot know that Jesus is the only savior neither do they have to know this in order to be committed to this Jesus. The experience of Jesus that has enabled them to say “truly” enables them © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 6   to keep following him. That there may be others is not an impediment to faithful following. Discipleship requires “truly”; it does not seem to require “solely” (p. 73). With similar logic he concludes that Jesus need be neither fully definitive nor unsurpassable. Rather he proposes that Jesus is universal (not limited to one people), decisive (in that he challenges us) and indispensable (which flows naturally from acceptance that he is universal and decisive). Christians bring to the table the uniqueness of Jesus’ interest in inclusivity and relationship. In representing that Christ-like uniqueness they will share with others the Christian value of contemplatives in action, says Knitter. Prompted by love of neighbor (which is, according to the first commandment, the manifestation of their love for God), Christians believe in the value of “historical involvement”. Believing that the God whom Jesus served has a preference for the poor and oppressed, Christians are concerned for those who suffer due to injustice, engaging in work to alleviate that injustice as they are able. And to the dialogue Christians bring a deep and abiding hope, a hope that enables them to believe that the world can be saved. Says Knitter, a “distinguishing mark of the disciples of Jesus and co-workers in God’s reign is that they don’t give up” (p. 97). To enter into dialogue with other faiths does not require that we abandon our understanding of Jesus’ uniqueness, or abandon a conviction that his way is an ethically important way. Insofar as Christians proclaim the “pure, unbounded love of God” at work in the world and therefore do not insist that Jesus is God’s full, final, or unsurpassable Word, they expect that for the most part their relationships with sincere believers of other paths will indeed be complementary. But insofar as Christians also experience God’s presence in Jesus to include universal, decisive, and indispensable claims, they will also be ready to take strong stands, sometimes in opposition, to the claims of others. (p. 82). But what of missions? This is perhaps the most critical issue for those who fear the goals of correlational or pluralistic dialogue. Throughout the centuries the Christian church has been motivated and animated by a sense of having been “sent” with good news of salvation. It believed it had a necessary role to play in God’s unfolding drama. But if the content of that good news is not for all people in all times, then is the missionary focus of the church still necessary or vital? Knitter claims that it is. And he contends that a pluralistic or correlational posture is still able to beckon disciples who will be sent out to speak good news that they believe is for everyone. It will however require a revision of the missionary mandate. © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 7   Knitter contends that pluralistic missionary disciples will still continue to affirm Jesus’ divinity. But by this he means (along with Karl Rahner, Paul Tillich, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Küng and Monika Hellwig) that To feel and proclaim that Jesus is divine is to encounter him as God’s sacrament, as the embodiment, the historical reality, the symbol, the story that makes God real and effective for me (p. 105). The message of salvation that they bring will encourage others to join in bringing about God’s reign (as opposed to desiring that they join the Christian church). The wellbeing of all creatures must be the mission’s foremost goal. More than Christological missiology, they will be concerned with pneumatological missiology which, Knitter believes, allows one to grasp the universality of God’s saving purpose, without dissolving the distinctive uniqueness of Jesus for Christians. Pneumatology allows for the moving of God’s spirit into realms and through mediums that doctrinal Christology disallows. Though it is a revisioned understanding of missions, Knitter believes that his missionary passion is as ardent today as it was in his earliest years of missionary work. The urgency of its goals can indeed beckon future generations to bear witness to the way of salvation and the good news that God is still engaged with us in saving work, albeit through a multiplicity of religious mediums. Missions as dialogue then, is Knitter’s image of missiology into the third millennium. Perhaps Knitter’s most intriguing and practical suggestion is his call for a dialogical model of theological education. Seminary students need opportunities to learn about traditions other than their own. In as much as dialogue with those of other faiths will become more and more the norm, there should be required courses in Islam, Asian religions and indigenous spiritualities. These courses should be taught not in an abstract informational way, but by professors and guest speakers who can present material experientially. Students must be called to enter “the other’s world of experience” (p. 162). There should be personal encounters fostered by “experimenting with the truth of - or at least observing the spiritual practices of other religions” (p. 162). Another way of engaging the “other’s” voice might be to engage certain issues from a variety of faith perspectives - “Courses on ‘Religions and Peace’ or ‘Buddhism, Christianity and Ecology’, or ‘Feminist Voices in Muslim- Christian Dialogue’ (p. 163). Such perspectives should be mainlined into all courses of Christian history, doctrinal, ethical and social issues. By this, Knitter means...that in teaching a standard course on evil or redemption or church or the question of God, teachers will inject into the discussions what other religious perspectives hold, how they sometimes radically differ, and how they provoke Christian tradition to further reflection. Naturally, given the expertise and general background of most theological faculties, such dreams of mainlining an interreligious conversation into the general curriculum cannot be realized overnight. But they will never be realized at all unless the ideal is affirmed (p. 163). © Grand Valley State University �Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 8   To this end, he would propose that all seminaries should include one or more faculty members trained in a non-Christian tradition. And students should be encouraged or required to sub-specialize in the “history, beliefs, and spirituality of another non- Christian religious path” (pp. 163-164). Paul Knitter envisions a new world of missions, one where the ultimate goal is no longer salvation through Christ to eternal life. Rather, the focus is on the reign of God emerging in our here and now. “The Kingdom of God is among you,” Jesus is purported to have said. Paul Knitter is eager, as a Christian, to join hands with those of other faiths in order to realize that very possibility. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Paul Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, 1996 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19960101 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-01-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1996 entitled "Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility", on the book Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility, written by Paul F. Knitter. Tags: Theology, Interfaith, Pluralism, Non-exclusive, Love, . Scripture references: Paul Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, 1996. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Interfaith Love Non-exclusive Pluralism Theology https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4258e32ac42487d3f89d949f71c2ea32.pdf a7eddff54faf48f1e26febdc07ee419e PDF Text Text Interreligious Dialogue: What Is Required of Us? Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought May 1995, pp. 10-15 Pilate’s question, “Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” demands an answer as urgently today as two thousand years ago. By travel and the ubiquitous beams of communications satellites the world has shrunk to a neighborhood, and the devotees of the great religions of the world no longer live in isolation. Increasingly they practice their respective faith traditions in close proximity to each other. Not only the interweaving of the world’s religions within the fabric of the global community but the rise of militant fundamentalisms, fueling ethnic conflict and spawning terrorism, make it imperative that interreligious dialogue take place for the sake of the peace of the world. Political leaders and parties will always attempt to Co-opt the respective religious traditions for their own purposes, but at least the religions in their authentic expression need not condone such misuse, and, with genuine dialogue, a deeper understanding of other faith traditions would be a force for the creation of a more secure world—and a movement toward a reign of peace, surely the intention of the Creator God. For the Christian religion, interreligious dialogue calls for a serious engagement with Pilate’s question. Until we come to a new appraisal of the place of Jesus in the purpose of God and the revelation of that purpose, we will not be able to enter into real dialogue. Beginning with the absoluteness of Christianity based on the finality of God’s revelation in Jesus and a salvation constituted exclusively through his atoning death, we may enter discussion and evidence a civil tolerance but without the openness to new insight that alone makes for serious and honest dialogue. Tolerance may be present in people who are convinced that they possess the final truth but are unwilling to impose it on another. But such an attitude also precludes that such people will learn something from the other since they begin with the assumption that theirs is the exclusive truth. © Grand Valley State University   �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 2   Whatever revisioning interreligious dialogue may demand from other faith traditions, for the Christian tradition, a rethinking of its core creedal Christological formulations and their salvific implications is of first importance. The Quest of the Historical Jesus As I look across my desk at the shelf of books, the name of Jesus is prominent. Book after book published in the last few years seeks to uncover the mystery and meaning of this one who “comes to us as One unknown...,” to use Schweitzer’s familiar designation. Studies emanate from the Jesus Seminar people, as well as many beyond their ranks, such as the Catholic scholar Raymond Brown and the highly respected Jewish scholar E. P. Sanders. My eye catches the title of an older bundle of essays by Marinus de Jonge, Jesus: Inspiring and Disturbing Presence. Indeed. I move to the shelf and pull down the classic study by Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus. In his preface to the English translation, F. C. Burkitt refers to the sharp controversy that had been raging on the continent in the late nineteenth century over the attempt to discover the historical Jesus behind the Christ figure that appears in the writings, particularly of Paul. Such sharp battle, he notes, is somewhat foreign to the more genteel English, but even those whose lives of Jesus were “written with hate” have performed a great service in bringing to light an understanding “of the greatest historical problem in the history of our race.” The new understanding, Burkitt claims, makes clear that the object of attack was not the historical Jesus after all, but a temporary idea of Him, inadequate because it did not truly represent him or the world in which he lived, (vi) Schweitzer’s work brought the first quest to an end by pointing out the eschatological center of Jesus’ message in contrast to the portrait that portrayed Jesus as the ideal person of nineteenth-century, European society. With the rise of historical thinking, it was being recognized that historical research must seek to uncover the context of the first and second centuries if it would discover Jesus of Nazareth. Burkitt was confident that such an understanding would be taken for granted in the ongoing research into Christian origins. He cites a contemporary, Father Tyrrell, who claimed that Christianity was at a crossroads, but Burkitt little doubts that the church would come to terms with the results of historical research and bring the significance of Jesus Christ to fresh expression. That the eschatological prophet of Schweitzer’s description would need to be translated into another image if he were to be meaningfully appropriated in the twentieth century went without saying. The dawning historical consciousness was leading to the recognition, in Burkitt’s words, © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 3   that absolute truth cannot be embodied in human thought and that its expression must always be clothed in symbols. It may be that we have to translate the hopes and fears of our spiritual ancestors into the language of our new world. (vii) That the Absolute can be expressed only in symbol, in metaphor, has been widely recognized through linguistic studies in the last half of the present century. Metaphor in its common understanding is a figure of speech in which there is a transfer of meaning—one term is illuminated by attaching to it some of the associations of another, so that metaphor is “that trope, or figure of speech, in which we speak of one thing in terms suggestive of another” (Soskice, 1985, 54). In this sense, all religious language and speech about God is metaphoric. That does not take away from the truthfulness of what is communicated; indeed, picture language often conveys a truth far better than a formula or abstract definition. It does, however, mean that the truth being conveyed and the linguistic form, the particular figure of speech, are not necessarily tied to each other. The same truth may be able to be conveyed by a different figure of speech, and in another culture or time a figure of speech that communicates the truth at issue may fail to bring that truth to expression with clarity. In other words, the symbols used to express the truth of the Absolute must not themselves be absolutized. The symbolic form of expression points beyond itself; one must “see through” the symbol to the reality symbolized. The form of expression, the specific figure of speech chosen to disclose the reality may be adequate or inadequate; it may disclose or it may mislead. Only those metaphoric forms that prove themselves in usage will last. But even those that prove valuable over the ages and generations must not be understood as identical with the truth or reality signified. There may arise in evolving cultural experience reason to cease using a metaphor or to modify its use if it becomes evident that it has conveyed not only aspects of truth but also misunderstanding that has proven detrimental – for example, the metaphor of God as Father in current feminist critique of patriarchy. When a metaphor for the Absolute is challenged, it must be recognized that it is not the Absolute that is challenged, but only the symbolic form used to disclose the truth of the Absolute. The Rise of Historical Thinking As he wrote the preface to Schweitzer’s The Quest of the Historical Jesus in 1910, Burkitt pointed to the growing recognition of the symbolic character of religious language in the wake of the rise of historical thinking in the nineteenth century. It was in that cultural context that the first quest of the historical Jesus took place, which Schweitzer showed to be naive. Further historical-critical research revealed the inadequacy of the historical methods employed and of the understanding of the nature of the biblical documents examined. Nevertheless, © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 4   thinking historically is the mark of modernity and remains so in post-modernism which, in general, denies the possibility of formulating principles or doctrines identical with foundational reality, along with rejecting the Enlightenment claim that there are universal truths of reason. We can see the implications of this new way of thinking—thinking with historical consciousness—if we examine the work of Ernst Troeltsch. He is best identified as an exponent of historicism, a term used here to define the interpretation of the totality of cultural development (including the Christian tradition) as phenomena of the historical process. Troeltsch recognized that the advent of the historicalcritical method signified more than just a new means by which to gain knowledge of the past. Far more, it symbolized a revolution in the consciousness of the person of the West. He was convinced that the employment of this method was incompatible with the traditional Christian faith based on a supernaturalistic metaphysics. This clash was most evident, as we have noted above, in the area of biblical criticism. Troeltsch did not point to particular results of scholarly research that was troubling to believers; rather, he pointed to the method that yielded the disturbing data. The assumptions of the method, he claimed, were irreconcilable with the traditional dogmatic method. Traditional dogmatic formulation regarded the Scriptures as supernaturally inspired; the historian assumed they must be understood in terms of the historical context in which they arose, subject to the same principles of interpretation and criticism applied to any ancient literature. The historian, following this method, according to Troeltsch, could not assume events recorded in Scripture were supernatural interventions by God; rather, the historian must treat them in the causal nexus of their times. And rather than granting uniqueness to the central redemptive events to which the Bible pointed, the historian must treat them as analogous to all other historical events past and present. Further, the historian’s research can yield only probable results, an inadequate ground for faith. Troeltsch’s ability to recognize the revolutionary nature of the employment of the historical-critical method revealed to him what remained hidden for many theological thinkers, namely, that one has to make a choice to accept the method and its consequences or to reject the method as inappropriate. What could not be done was to use the method as long as the consequences were compatible with one’s theological presuppositions and reject it when they went counter to one’s prior belief. The church must choose, Troeltsch was certain, to employ the method and accept the consequences, letting burn what must burn and then building again a truer, if more humble, foundation. It was his conviction that historical thinking had penetrated the mind of the Western person so deeply that it was no longer possible to think in any other vein. Either the Christian tradition would © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 5   accommodate itself to the spirit of the times or it would become a relic of the past. In his discussion of the significance of the historicity of Jesus for Christian faith, Troeltsch included Schleiermacher, Ritschl, and Herrmann in his criticism, for while the liberal Protestant tradition recognized the validity of the historicalcritical method for the investigation of Christian origins, it failed to recognize the relativity of all historical phenomena including Jesus of Nazareth. Consequently Troeltsch could but condemn their view that Jesus is the absolute Savior for all people of all times and places (cf. Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu für den Glauben p. 51). In Troeltsch’s view the very historical-critical approach to Christian origins, especially to Jesus himself, undercut any attempt to salvage from the uniformity of history a final and absolute revelation of God. Thus Troeltsch was convinced that the theology of the future would have to purge away the last vestiges of the old dogmatic approach and carry through more rigorously the requirements of the historical-critical method that draws all historical phenomena, Jesus of Nazareth not excepted, into the movement of historical process, allowing for no absolute uniqueness in the midst of the relative. Paradoxical as it may appear, Karl Barth quite agreed with Troeltsch—agreed, that is, that to subject Jesus to historical-critical research behind the witness of the New Testament is to level him down to one historical person among others, in whom there cannot possibly be found the final and definitive revelation of God. Of course, agreement with Troeltsch that having followed the path it did, there was no stopping halfway, does not imply that Barth advocates with Troeltsch that their successors should draw the logical conclusion as Troeltsch advocated. On the contrary, Barth discovers their fatal error in the course they chose to follow in the first place. It was not their decision to grant recognition to the use of the historical-critical method and then fail to draw the conclusions to which it led. Rather, it was their understanding of religion as an innate potential of the human spirit and their failure to see that, defined in such terms, the Christian faith was not being spoken of at all. If Christianity were a phenomenon of the religious capacity of the human person, then it would be one religion among others and could be understood only, as Troeltsch maintained, by a comparative historical study. In such an instance there could be no talk of an absolute and definitive revelatory significance or meaning in history. If one started where Troeltsch started, Barth maintained, one would end where Troeltsch ended. But then, according to Barth, we have to do not with the religion of revelation but with the revelation of religion (Church Dogmatics I, 2, 284), and the application of the historical-critical method will discover in Jesus no more than a man among other men and in Christianity no more than a religion among other religions. The History of Religions school is only the logical outcome of a theology that speaks of the believing person rather than of the revealing God. Theology that takes itself © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 6   seriously can speak only from the revelation of God that has grasped it, paying homage to no worldview, be it ancient or modern, to no philosophical system, and to no anthropological analysis of the human religious capacity. Theology must speak from out of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Thus Barth completely repudiated the method of Troeltsch, and, to the dismay of the academic world, pursued the traditional dogmatic method, reducing historical-critical research to a secondary, helping role in the explication of the biblical witness to Jesus Christ. Barth’s repudiation of Troeltsch and the whole project of nineteenth-century liberalism prevailed. A whole generation of theologians was shaped by the theology of the Word that, while not a uniform movement, was at one in removing the truth of Christian faith from the results of historical investigation. But as the twentieth century nears its end, Troeltsch is being studied anew. Garrett E. Paul in a 1993 Christian Century article asks and answers in his title, “Why Troeltsch? Why Today? Theology for the 21st Century.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer had exposed the Achilles’ heel of Barth’s dogmatic method with his recognition of Barth’s “positivism of revelation.” Writing from prison to his friend Eberhard Bethge, Bonhoeffer pointed out that Barth was the first theologian to begin the criticism of religion but that he replaced it with a positivist doctrine of revelation that says in effect, “Take it or leave it.” In a later letter he affirmed Barth’s ethical observations as well as his dogmatic views, but went on to write: it was that he gave no concrete guidance, either in dogmatics or in ethics, on the non-religious interpretation of theological concepts. There lies his limitation, and because of it his theology of revelation becomes positivist, a “positivism of revelation,” as I put it. Bultmann, who joined Barth in the removal of Christian origins from historical investigation, claiming the necessity only of the “dass” of the historical Jesus for faith, also saw his disciples move away from this view as they engaged in “the new quest of the historical Jesus.” Presently the flood of studies being published, including the work of the Jesus Seminar scholars, indicates that the implications of historical thinking recognized and applied by Troeltsch will not go away. Karl Barth, arguably the greatest theological thinker of the century and among the greats of all time, was able by the power of his thought and the circumstances of his historical moment to stem the tide of historical thinking applied to theological formulation for a generation, but the kerygma sheltered in a safe haven denying investigation of historical foundations cannot finally be maintained no matter how brilliantly and powerfully proclaimed. Hans Küng in Great Christian Thinkers (1994) identifies Barth as one of a line of theologians—Paul, Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, and Schleiermacher— © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 7   who effected a paradigm shift in theological understanding. But in his analysis of Barth, Küng claims that he initiated the paradigm shift to postmodernity but did not complete it. With great regard for Barth’s accomplishments, Küng nevertheless confirms Bonhoeffer’s claim made a half century ago. Recognizing that the later Barth was reevaluating the knowledge of God available from the world of creation, natural theology, and world religions, Kung maintains that in the end this dogmatic edifice conceived on such a large scale, stringently constructed and carefully built, had at least in principle (though most Barthians hardly noticed) been blown up! It is Küng’s contention that if Barth could start over, “he would attempt to work out a Christian theology in the context of the world religions and the world regions.” How would Barth go about this, according to Küng? He would have attempted to work out a responsible historical-critical dogmatics in the light of an exegesis with a historical-critical foundation, in order in this way co translate the original Christian message... for the future that had dawned in such a way that it was again understood as a liberating address from God. (120) And, Küng contends, the “historical Jesus,” apart from whom the “Christ of dogma” becomes a myth to be manipulated at will, might “again become of the utmost importance and urgency.” We have come, it would appear, full circle during the course of this century. The current reconsideration of Ernst Troeltsch stems from his early grasp of the implications of historical thinking for theological formulation. He was an interdisciplinary thinker at home in various realms of inquiry. He faced up to the demise of Eurocentricism and the relativity of all historical events and human knowledge – religious, philosophical, and scientific. Thus he acknowledged that Christian faith was relative to its largely Western orientation and environment. At the beginning of this century Troeltsch foresaw the global pluralism with which we are finally beginning to come to terms. In 1910, Burkitt was expressing the implication of a new way of thinking, thinking historically, thinking in terms of development, the evolving conception of truth. Such a way of thinking is widely accepted in our world, but it has been resisted in the conservative sectors of the church because it can lead to the morass of relativism and the denial of the Absolute and of absolute truth. But such a result is not the necessary consequence of historical thinking. Rather, it can simply lead to the recognition expressed by Burkitt—that every human attempt to express absolute truth is only a relative expression—relative to one’s cultural context—a partial grasp of the absolute that will always transcend any historically conditional expression. Further, that expression is possible only in symbolic form, by use of metaphor. © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 8   My purpose in introducing the limits and possibilities of historical thinking is in order to point the way to authentic and fruitful interreligious dialogue. Such dialogue is imperative for our world. The frightening prospect of a world in the throes of religious conflict makes it incumbent upon us to find a way to effect communication and mutual respect among the world religions. That will not be possible unless we are willing to apply the insights of historical thinking to the core credal development of Christology, including the various theories of the atonement that have been formulated throughout the centuries. The Development of Doctrine Burkitt was too confident in 1910. The twentieth century has not seen a fresh expression of the meaning of Jesus Christ in the church. Rather there has been strenuous resistance to any revisioning of core Christological formulations. This resistance to revisioning has been pointed out by the Anglican priest John Bowden in Jesus: The Unanswered Questions (1988). He is troubled by the church’s refusal to engage in serious discussion of the unavoidable questions surrounding Jesus that have arisen as our knowledge of the cultural context of his life and the checkered history of credal development have become apparent. Bowden writes from the perspective of faith, from within the tradition of the Christian church, and for love of the faith and the church. But he raises the unanswered and disturbing questions that must be addressed if the church is to engage the spiritual quest of those for whom responsible, intelligent inquiry must accompany the commitment of faith. Thus, his purpose in writing is pastoral and positive. From a broad spectrum of research he has distilled the critical questions that demand a hearing. Reflecting on his own theological training, he finds it remarkable that, after a thorough immersion in the historical-critical study of Scripture, he found quite a different approach to the history of Christian doctrine up to the year 451, the year of the Council of Chalcedon and the formulation of the classical statement about the natures of Jesus Christ. The theological reasoning and philosophical argument of those early centuries used the Bible in quite another fashion than he had learned to use it in his biblical studies. While the different cultural patterns of the early centuries of Christian dogmatic formulation were recognized, the conclusions of the church fathers were not to be questioned after Chalcedon; they were a given. But, Bowden contends, the conclusions of those early centuries need to be questioned as seriously as the gospel record has been. Biblical criticism must be joined by doctrinal criticism that will examine the historical development in those early centuries that culminated in the classic credal definitions of Incarnation and Trinity, an historical development about which we have data enough to trace the interplay of cultural forces involving not only concern for the truth but political power plays and ecclesiastical intrigue. We really know the story. We © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page 9   have simply refused to draw out the implications for this core credal affirmation. But until we do, we will not be able to engage in honest interreligious discussion. Doctrinal formulation is a human enterprise. Human thought forms and human language are the tools of such formulation. To acknowledge that as fundamental for historical thinking is not a denial of absolute truth, as previously stated. It is only to recognize that any particular articulation of the truth cannot be absolutized and be raised to a status beyond further reflection and possible reformulation. It is simply to acknowledge that it is a given of our human historical condition that we are limited to relative apprehensions, partial understandings that need always to be adjusted in light of new information gathered from research and ongoing historical experience. John Hick is a Christian thinker who has utilized the distinction between the Absolute and the respective relative apprehensions of the Absolute in the great world religions. Being a Christian, he has applied that insight to the development of the Christological formulations of the early centuries in the interest of developing a Christology in a pluralistic age. Christology Revisited John Hick has a ready grasp of the development of the Christian theological tradition as well as a deep knowledge of other religious traditions. For him, the window to the Real, to God, is Jesus and the Christian tradition. But he believes that the Real is apprehended through other traditions as well. Thus he believes there is a pluralism of ways of salvation. He argues his case in The Metaphor of God Incarnate (1993), in which he contends that the necessary revision of Christological understanding that alone can make way for genuine interreligious dialogue will involve “liberation from the network of theories—about Incarnation, Trinity and Atonement….” Hick contends that divine incarnation in its standard Christian form, in which both genuine humanity and genuine deity are insisted upon, has never been given a satisfactory literal sense; but that on the other hand it makes excellent metaphorical sense….We see in Jesus a human being extraordinarily open to God’s influence and thus living to an extraordinary extent as God’s agent on earth, “incarnating” the divine purpose for human life. He thus embodied within the circumstances of his time and place the ideal of humanity living in openness and response to God, and in doing so he “incarnated” a love that reflects the divine love. (12) Hick, in a sense, is attempting to fulfill the task that in 1910 Burkitt foresaw as necessary if the church were going to face the consequences of the historical study of Christian origins and translate the figure of Jesus into an understanding meaningful to the twentieth century. © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page10   Yet, the work of translation does not proceed without resistance, as Bowden points out. In his opening chapter, Hick himself reviews the explosion that erupted following the publication in 1977 of The Myth of God Incarnate, a volume of essays by leading New Testament scholars and theologians, of which he was one. “Thundering sermons and clerical pronouncements,” along with articles in the British press called for the Anglicans among the authors to resign their orders, and publication of a flurry of conservative retorts erected a wall of opposition to the insights and implications as they were articulated in The Myth of God Incarnate. From the tenor of the responses, one would have thought nothing in the church’s understanding had been affected in spite of two hundred years of intensive research and discussion. While the results of the historicalcritical study of the Bible had gained some acceptance, there obviously remained a formidable barrier to the same kind of investigation of the historical process that transformed Jesus of Nazareth into the ontological Son of God, second person of the Trinity, in the credal development of the fourth and fifth centuries. Hick addresses the third element of the doctrinal triad he contends needs revisioning, the understanding of the death of Jesus as an atoning sacrifice. He traces the history of the development of the doctrine, pointing out the cultural contexts that influenced the respective theories over the centuries. Then he asks, as in the case with other doctrines, what was the original experience out of which atonement theory arose, for it is that same gracious, liberating experience that we seek in our day. Rejecting the idea of an objective justice requiring punishment for wrongdoing, a moral law that God can and must satisfy by punishing the innocent in place of the guilty, Hick searches for a way to express the idea of atonement in the broad sense, in the etymological meaning of at-one-ment becoming one with God—not ontologically but, rather, being in right relationship with God, being in a state of salvation. He points to Eastern Orthodoxy as a valuable source for understanding with its idea of restoration to the divine image, salvation as a process of transformation. In such a view, “Jesus’ death was a piece with his life, expressing a total integrity in his self-giving to God; and his cross continues to inspire and challenge on a level that does not involve the atonement theories developed by the Churches.” With such an understanding of the death of Jesus, Hick is able to find similar meanings of salvation in other religious faiths. Thus he contends, these different conceptions of salvation are specifications of what, in a generic formula, is the transformation of human existence from selfcenteredness to a new orientation centered in the divine Reality.... The great world religions, then, are ways of salvation. Each claims to constitute an effective context within which the transformation of human existence can and does take place from self-centeredness to Realitycenteredness. (136) © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page11   With such a perspective, genuine interreligious dialogue can begin. It will become an empirical process of seeking to discover the fruits of the respective religions in human life. The alternative to such a stance is to bring to the discussion an understanding of atonement that necessitates a Christian absolutism of the exclusivist variety—that outside of the knowledge of and faith in Jesus Christ, his death and resurrection, salvation is not possible, or, an inclusivist view that salvation is only through Christ but explicit knowledge and trust are not necessary to receive the benefits of his death and resurrection. The ranks of the exclusivists are thinning. Evangelicals are increasingly trying to find a broader arena for God’s saving embrace. Clark Pinnock’s A Wideness in God’s Mercy: The Finality of Jesus Christ in a World of Religions and John Sanders’s No Other Name: An Investigation into the Destiny of the Unevangelized attempt this, although they thread a tortuous way because they have not yet shed an earlier view of biblical authority nor questioned the core Christological formulation. Schubert Ogden suggests an alternative to Hick. In a 1993 address at the Divinity School in Chicago, he argued against the pluralists’ claim as well as rejecting the claims of exclusivists and inclusivists alike. But in his approach there is also a revisioning of the classical Christological formulations in which salvation is constituted through Jesus Christ alone. Rather than a constitutive Christology, Ogden argues for a representative Christology. In this view, the Christ event represents the claim that “salvation has always already been constituted by what Christians are wont to think and speak of as the primordial and everlasting love of God.” Whether and where that love of God might elsewhere be represented is to be determined in the discussion without prior commitment to exclusivism, inclusivism, or pluralism. One simply enters the dialogue open to the truth claim of the other. My intention is not to advocate Hick or Ogden or any other thinker who is addressing the matter of interreligious dialogue. Rather, I wish to point to the necessity of honestly drawing out the consequences of the recognition that human grasp of the truth develops, evolves, and needs ongoing assessment and adjustment—and sometimes conceptions need to be rejected. By use of historical imagination the originating experience that gave rise to a theological formulation needs to be recovered in order to express the same reality differently, in order to make the experience available in a totally different cultural context. Rather than seeing this as a burden, a cause for fear and defensiveness, it should be seen as an exciting challenge. Is not such a pursuit of the truth to love God with mind as well as heart? And is not the recognition that every biblical and theological expression is marked by the human and historical limitations that adhere to all human thought the reason there is need for continual reformation? To be Reformed is not to be in possession of a set of timeless and eternal truths but, rather, to refuse to absolutize any human arrangement or formulation. It is © Grand Valley State University �Interreligious Dialogue Richard A. Rhem Page12   not to be saddled with a set of truths that were once new, innovative, and destabilizing of the established order of the sixteenth century, or the first century. It is an approach, a spirit, a posture that is open to new knowledge, fresh insight, and cumulative human experience within historical development. The church has managed to spend the century in a state of schizophrenia, pursuing research in the academy and sharing the results in the lecture hall, while the liturgy, prayers, hymns, and sermons have given little evidence of the honest engagement with insights of the modern period. My mentor, Hendrikus Berkhof, claimed the only heresy was to make the gospel boring. I would add another—the heresy of orthodoxy, the evidence of a failure of nerve and lack of trust in the living God. It is the heresy of an inordinate lust for certitude that seeks premature closure, the shutting down of the quest for truth and growth of knowledge in the magnificent and mysterious cosmos by the creatures whom the Creator calls to consciousness and embraces in a grace that pervades the unfolding cosmic process. References: John Stephen Bowden. Jesus: The Unanswered Questions. Abingdon Press, 1989. F.C. Burkitt, Preface to The Quest of the Historical Jesus by Albert Schweitzer. Dover Publications, Dover Ed edition, 2005. John Hick. The Metaphor of God Incarnate: Christology in a Pluralistic Age (Second edition). Westminster John Knox Press, 2nd edition, 2006. Ernst Troeltsch. Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu für den Glauben. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References John S. Bowden, Jesus: The Unanswered Questions, 1989, John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, 2006, Albert Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus, 2005, Ernst Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu fur den Glauben. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19950501 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995-05-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Interreligious Dialogue: What is Required of Us? Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on May 1, 1995 entitled "Interreligious Dialogue: What is Required of Us?", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 10-15. Tags: Global Community, Pluralism, Interfaith, Historical Jesus, Metaphor, Grace, Mystery, Incarnation. Scripture references: John S. Bowden, Jesus: The Unanswered Questions, 1989, John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, 2006, Albert Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus, 2005, Ernst Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu fur den Glauben.. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Global Community Grace Historical Jesus Incarnation Interfaith Metaphor Mystery Pluralism https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c4c20c42bf96629eb62ee2b7b5a17b05.pdf fe18060ae9231b42e53bab0b4ec7062c PDF Text Text Life Through Dying An Article By Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought November 1994, pp. 3-4 “Life, what a beautiful choice!” So goes a commercial for pro-life in the culture war over abortion. The ads are tastefully done featuring beautiful children frolicking in idyllic scenes of delight. Fair enough as long as it is recognized at the same time that there are also children born into horror whose existence is to be marked by dehumanizing tragedy. Recently I have been, as pastors often are, thrust into the drama of real life-anddeath choices. Not choices about whether to bring a fetus to term but, rather, whether to keep a body alive by means of medical technology. Three times within a four-month period I walked with families through the anguish of making the decision to let go, to allow a loved one to die. The three had been my people over many years; they were dear to me, as were their families as well—spouses, children, grandchildren. In periods of five days to ten days I watched and waited with the families. The experience was as filled with beauty as it was filled with anguish. The bonding of children and grandchildren in solidarity with a parent or grandparent was moving. Thankfully, in all three cases there were living wills in order, and the desires of the person in question were clear. Those desires were honored. The deceased had, while in good health, chosen not to be sustained in a less-than-human condition. Two of the three died in the hospital; the third had been sent home to die. During the five-day vigil at the home, we watched life ebb. The two grandchildren stood on either side of the bed, rubbing their grandfather’s arms, intensely monitoring each labored breath. The love was palpable. After a time, I went to this dear man and took his hand. In his ear I spoke the benediction. I spoke his name, asking him, if he were able, to squeeze my hand if all were well. There was a feeble but certain response. I kissed him and left. Within a couple hours he entered that eternal light. It struck me then, as it had in the hospital earlier, that in honoring his choice to die without radical intervention, he (as they) had in actuality chosen life. © Grand Valley State University   �Life Through Dying Richard A. Rhem Page 2   Of late I have been preparing a series of sermons on the wisdom literature of the Hebrew Scriptures. Israel’s wisdom teachers were careful observers of human experience. With clear-eyed candor, they recorded their observations of how life really is, not how we long for it to be. Their legacy is the wise counsel of sages who have discerned a way that leads to well-being. Their teaching contrasted the way of wisdom that leads to life and the way of foolishness whose end is destruction. The challenge is to choose the path of wisdom, thereby finding life. Choose life! In an early writing, In Man We Trust, Walter Brueggemann says, The man of Proverbs is not the servile, self-abasing figure often urged by our one-sided reading of Scripture in later Augustinian-Lutheran theological tradition. Rather he is an able, self-reliant, caring, involved, strong person who has a significant influence over the course of his own life and over the lives of his fellows. (118) Thus the challenge of the Deuteronomist: ... I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live.... (Deut. 30:19) The human person as understood in the wisdom tradition was both capable and responsible to choose wisely and thus to find the way of life. I had never spent much time with the wisdom literature. But in preaching from Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes I have become aware of a rich vein of biblical teaching that calls the human person to maturity, to take responsibility for one’s life by making responsible choices, choices that at either end of life’s spectrum are choices of life and death. Paradoxically, I am realizing that a choice for death sometimes means a choice for life. In the current cultural war raging on questions of abortion and euthanasia, one hears that life is sacred, God’s gift, and thus that it is wrong to abort a fetus or to end a life of irremediable and terrible suffering. These are exceedingly complex matters and simplistic slogans will not do. But, that we are called to make very difficult choices cannot be denied. The question is not whether life is sacred; it is. Life is God’s gift. But the more we understand about the mystery of human existence, the more medical technology makes possible intrauterine procedures and life-sustaining measures at the end, the more incumbent it is upon us to make choices that lead to life, wise choices made upon careful, serious reflection and discussion before the face of God. One sometimes hears the argument that life is a continuum from conception to death. Biologically, that is irrefutably true. But is biology the measure of life? Is that the life spoken of by the wisdom teachers? If so, then there will be no real © Grand Valley State University �Life Through Dying Richard A. Rhem Page 3   choices to make. But if life involves more than biological reality, if life involves also some quality of humanness—humane existence—then, given what is possible through the advancement of medical science, the choice for life will demand serious thought and prayerful contemplation. And the choices will be made, not simply regarding the immediate subject whose situation calls for decision, but the larger implications touching the others immediately involved, indeed, the community. Resistance to making decisions and taking initiative is a refusal to be responsible and accountable as a human person, a human society before the face of God. I found the wisdom literature a strange new world in the Scriptures. As Brueggemann points out, at first blush it may seem that wisdom threatens the traditional idea of God’s sovereignty. Not so. What is at issue is not whether God is sovereign but, rather, the tenor of that sovereignty. It is not the more traditional sovereign who appears angry or at least grudging. The sovereignty of God affirmed in wisdom is that of a God who accepts the legitimacy of his rule and therefore the legitimacy of the freedom of his human subjects. (119) The church has too long kept people in spiritual adolescence rather than calling them to maturity, to decision making grounded in honest observance of human experience, cultural development, and growing insight into cosmic reality. In Brueggemann’s words, the church has fostered a kind of piety that “places it all in God’s hands” and an understanding of prayer which looks blindly to God for guidance and answers. Too often this is a not very subtle form of copping out so that we don’t have to make our own choices and exercise responsibility. (20) Life is a beautiful choice—life as humane existence. To choose for life is sometimes to let go, to let die, in the confidence that in life, in death, the Lord and Giver of life will never let us go. Reference: Walter Brueggemann. In Man We Trust: The Neglected Side of Biblical Faith. John Knox Press, 1973; Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2006. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Walter Brueggemann, In Man We Trust: The Neglected Side of Biblical Faith, 1973, 2006 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19941101 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1994-11-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Life Through Dying Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on November 1, 1994 entitled "Life Through Dying", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 3-4. Tags: Hebrew Scriptures, Wisdom Literature, Death, Life, Nature of God. Scripture references: Walter Brueggemann, In Man We Trust: The Neglected Side of Biblical Faith, 1973, 2006. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Death Hebrew Scriptures Life Nature of God Wisdom Literature https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f6c9d7442b0329a1599ff0235ca04423.pdf 90d977968c1498f6521b610cfaa0cb70 PDF Text Text The Vision Must Not Die An Article Reviewing the Vision of Arie R. Brouwer As Shown in His Writings by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought March 1994, pp. 11-13 On October 7,1993, the Rev. Dr. Arie R. Brouwer died after a ten-month struggle against cancer. His death was noted in the New York Times, recognizing the worldwide dimensions of his ministry. A brief memorial piece appeared in this journal in the December 1993 issue. With his passing the church has lost a significant leader, one of the most significant leaders in the last half of the century. This is true for his own denomination and true as well for the world church as it has come together in the ecumenical movement. Arie has died but the vision by which he lived must not die, a vision for “the unity and renewal of the Christian community as sign, instrument, and foretaste of the unity and renewal of the community of humankind and the whole creation.” Ours was a long-time friendship going back to college days. Our paths continued to cross though we journeyed in divergent directions, he holding the top executive posts in the Reformed Church in America and the ecumenical councils; I remaining essentially in one congregation. But over the last four years of his life we were able to spend meaningful time together and be in frequent communication. In a most remarkable way, from divergent paths, we discovered to our mutual delight that we shared a common faith, understanding, and vision for the church. I know of no one who worked more faithfully and consistently to implement that vision than Arie Brouwer. I know of no one who articulated it with greater clarity or passion. As tribute to him, out of my profound respect for the ministry he carried out, I want to lift up some aspects of his vision. The aspects I have selected reflect the areas about which we reflected together and about which he has written. While making no claim to present the full spectrum of his vision and passion, I am certain what follows is faithful to that vision and passion at its heart. © Grand Valley State University   �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 2   That the Church Be One Arie’s commitment to the ecumenical movement was unwavering to the end. Even following his resignation from the office of General Secretary of the National Council of Churches of Christ he remained convinced that the only way into the future for the church lay in a movement toward unity. In an article that appeared in The Christian Century (Feb. 23, 1990) he raised the question Can the mainline find new life on the ecumenical way? He answered with a strong affirmative. He was well aware of the obstacles to a truly ecumenical Christian church. Indeed, he had faced them head-on, daring to confront entrenched power and vested interest that obstructed the way to renewal. In chapter 9 of his journal, dated June 11,1993, he entitled the entry “Unfinished Business—My Ecumenical Vocation.” He referred to some correspondence he had received that gave him occasion to speak positively of his own opportunity to use his positions of influence. He felt fortunate to be able to use that influence in order to empower the institutions he administered to serve their respective constituencies for the well being of the human community. He expressed the hope that “somewhere beyond the far horizon” there are church leaders in formation who will have “the will, wit and wisdom” to lead the church to the realization of the ecumenical vision. He recognized the present survival posture of the mainline denominations. Simply taking measures to survive, their leaders are distracted from the ecumenical vision, and the resources available to the councils are drained away. It is now widely recognized that the respective mainline denominations are in very serious trouble, their future in the present configuration in doubt. He wrote an appendix to that journal entry, cited above, which he entitled “A Few Notes on Ecumenical Immobility.” There he pointed to the fact that the ecumenical councils of churches, the main instruments of the ecumenical movement, are now almost completely captive to the churches. In The Christian Century, June 27July 4, 1990, Arie documented the resistance to restructuring he had encountered, listing the ecclesiological claims of the churches, the institutional interests of the denominations, economic control, and ideological alignments within the churches and the Council itself. Writing with the intimate knowledge of an insider, he contended: With the churches in control, it follows that most of the leading participants in most council meetings are either ecclesiastical bureaucrats or hierarchs, who are mostly prisoners of their positions. Real movement toward unity would render most of their present positions redundant. ... Very few bureaucrats, church bureaucrats included, are willing to put their positions at risk—even in the face of open violation of truth or justice, much less for the sake of a vision only dimly perceived. (Journal, 47) © Grand Valley State University �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 3   Confronted by such a sobering realization, Arie yet remained hopeful; his vision did not waver. If the present institutional framework of the Councils offered no possibility of renewal, then another way must be found. That was part of his greatness. He recognized the historical imprisonment of church structures. He worked with a certain freedom as a church executive, freedom from the numbing paralysis that immobilizes lesser leaders who expend their energy shoring up outworn structures. In an article published in The Christian Century, he indicated that he was aware already a decade earlier that the dwindling away of national denominational program bureaucracies was inevitable and the trend irreversible. Not happy about it, he nevertheless neither went on the defensive nor threw up his hands in despair. Rather he plunged into the leadership of the conciliar movement with great energy and hope. The future he felt would lie in ecumenical relationship—the churches needed more than a new way of acting; they needed a new way of thinking, a new self-understanding. “Only thus,” he contended, “can they be set free from cultural captivity, ecclesiastical enchantment, institutional survivalism, traditional confessionalism and other ‘isms’ that bind them.” Arie gave this effort his best wisdom and strength of leadership but finally concluded renewal could not come as long as the present framework of the councils remained in place. Still he would not give up the vision; he sought yet another way. In the last months of his life he served as interim pastor of the Glen Rock Community Church in New Jersey. His excitement about returning to the parish, to preparation of liturgy and preaching was evident. Here he saw the arena for renewal for the whole church “from below.” The Ecumenical Congregation In his journal he spoke of his vision for an ecumenical congregation. He noted the number of congregations that have represented in their membership a plurality of diverse traditions and saw these concrete communities as an “interesting ecumenical opportunity.” If the diverse traditions could be consciously articulated in congregational life ... their particular contribution to the fullness of the Gospel (the tradition) recognized and affirmed and then integrated in a recognizable way into the life and worship, particularly the worship, of the congregation, then I believe we would create, yes create, congregations with a sturdiness and attractiveness that would give them a burst of new life, perhaps even ending the mainline malaise. (42) His focus turned to the local congregation, not as withdrawal from the ecumenical enterprise, but as the instrument through which to bring renewal to the whole church. He became convinced that the way forward in the ecumenical movement was to be found in a movement from below. He cites the example of the base communities of Latin America but sees it as a mistake simply to adopt © Grand Valley State University �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 4   that strategy. Rather, he contends, “we must create the forms for such movements from below appropriate to our own culture” (43). For the United States, he was convinced, the model was ecumenical congregations. He speaks of his first efforts at creating such a congregation, efforts cut short by his cancer. But his passion for the vision is evident as he writes, From such ecumenical congregations could, I believe, eventually grow a National Christian Council that could gradually transform the anachronistic and divisive denominational structures that are now stifling the ecumenical movement. Deprived of their determinative divisiveness, the denominations could serve a function in such a council much like that of the orders within the Roman Catholic Church. (43) In his recognition of the congregation as the instrument through which renewal would come to the whole church, Arie clung to his ecumenical vision but demonstrated again, as he had throughout his various executive leadership roles, his ability to let go of anachronistic structures and trust the Spirit to create new wineskins—and new wine. In his last work in a parish he was realizing a deep longing, “the longing to rearticulate my faith—not in an academic work of theology, but in song and sermon and liturgy—in precisely such an ecumenical congregation.” A Spirit-Seeking Tradition As he was gathering his writings and speeches from the decade of his ecumenical leadership, he found three themes recurring—elements of renewal that he stated thus in a speech he delivered at that time: A life-celebrating liturgy (worship and faith), A community-building structure (order and life and work), A Spirit-seeking tradition (theology, doctrine and dogma). When he was forced to lay down his work in the spring of 1993 he was deeply engaged in the first element, creating a life-celebrating liturgy. Much of his vocational life was given over to creating community-building structures, but that I must leave to others to record. Here let me lift up that third element of renewal —a Spirit-seeking tradition. Arie’s theological pilgrimage brought him to an ever-greater appreciation of the Spirit as the source of the living tradition of the church. His ecumenical encounter with orthodoxy impacted Arie deeply. In a lecture entitled “On Being Reformed in the Ecumenical Movement,” he quoted the Greek Orthodox theologian Georges Florovsky who claimed that © Grand Valley State University �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 5   loyalty to tradition means not only concord with the past, but in a certain sense freedom from the past.... Tradition is the constant abiding of the Spirit, and not only the memory of words. Tradition is a charismatic, not an historical principle. (Bible, Church, Tradition, vol. 1, 80.) Arie admits that following the Spirit is a risky journey, a risk Reformed scholasticism did its best to reduce. He writes, The scholastics defended the deposit of the tradition but did not sustain the dynamic of the tradition. They stressed the testament of the Spirit, but neglected the testimony of the Spirit. They followed past confessions but did not lead in present confessing; they preserved the Reformed faith but did not pursue reforming the faith. (Ecumenical Testimony, 310f.) The tradition congealed, he points out, at the Great Synod of Dort (1618-1619), and immediately thereafter the Dutch delegates, meeting in a separate session, “froze the tradition solid,” declaring that the creeds were “in all things conformable to the Word of God.” The die was cast – ongoing theological inquiry was ruled out of bounds from that time forward. Arie describes the disastrous affect this absolutizing of an historically conditioned credal formulation has had on the church. It will not do, he claims, simply to chip away at the frozen forms. Rather, If we want the tradition to flow freely and clearly as the water of life for a thirsty world, we will need to thaw it out. (311) The lecture, delivered at Western Theological Seminary, was printed in this journal (October 1990) and three persons were invited to respond to it, one a Christian Reformed pastor-theologian. Dr. Clarence Boomsma, for whom Arie had profound respect. Boomsma was very affirming of the lecture but claimed that the place and authority of the Bible needed to be firmly established and, further, he maintained that the role of Scripture was “muted and unclear” in the discussion of both our Reformed tradition and the ecumenical movement. In response to that critique, Arie wrote that the place and role of Scripture was indeed a difference between them. I have long struggled with what I have come to think of as the fundamental irony of the Reformed tradition: While insisting that the Word of God written has been given to us by the Spirit, we have often made the Spirit captive to that Word. And this in the face of the Scripture’s own clear testimony that the Spirit cannot be bound. We can transcend the irony if we affirm that even as the Canons of Dort cannot bind the Word of God, so the canons of Scripture cannot bind the Spirit of God — The church is reformed by the Spirit of God and according to the Word of God. (Perspectives, Oct. 1990, 13.) © Grand Valley State University �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 6   For Arie, the sense of the Spirit as the source of the living tradition of the church was a growing edge. In Ecumenical Testimony he published an article that had appeared in The Reformed Journal in the mid-seventies under the title, “Worship in the Reformed Church in America.” He retitled it “A Life-Embracing Liturgy,” and in his introductory comments noted that if he were to write the article in 1991 he would write one key paragraph differently. I would not say, “The Word of God renews the Church,” but rather the Spirit of God. According to the Word, to be sure, but in the power of the Spirit, who is “The Lord and Giver of Life.” Already then I mostly thought that, but apparently not yet firmly enough to challenge the safety devices of Reformed scholasticism that have so long subjected the Spirit to the Word—especially the Word written. That subjugation I believe to be the major impediment to the renewal of the tradition. (Ecumenical Testimony, 226) In the end it was the renewal of the whole church for which Arie longed, and it was his conviction that the Reformed community was strategically positioned to spearhead such renewal through openness to the Spirit. Precisely because we have understood ourselves at our best as a reform movement in the one Church of Christ—not as something separate and apart—we are committed at the core of our being to a church: one, holy, catholic and apostolic. Our calling to reform the tradition then can be accomplished only by engaging the whole tradition of the whole church in its mission to the whole world. (Ecumenical Testimony, 313L) The Vision Must Not Die In the Foreword to Ecumenical Testimony, which Arie invited me to write, I expressed my profound respect and admiration for the leadership he had given to the church, noting that his solid rootedness in his own particular tradition combined with the breadth of exposure he experienced in the world church resulted in a clear-eyed view of the promise and peril of tradition. Deep formation in his Dutch Calvinist pietism and mysticism combined with an historical sense and the dynamism of the Spirit to create newness made him a rare visionary leader. Only God’s Spirit, “The Lord and giver of life,” can renew the church. That, Arie Brouwer knew well. Yet his sturdy Calvinist spirit understood that not as a passive acquiescence to the inexorable drift of historical trends and circumstances from which he could not escape. Trusting the Spirit, Arie acted, led, sought the will of God. Of God’s will he wrote, We seek it; we search it out with a passion. As we discover the will of God, we strive to do the will of God in order that in our doing what we know, we may learn what we do not know. (Ecumenical Testimony, 317) © Grand Valley State University �The Vision Must Not Die Richard A. Rhem Page 7   To lose such a leader is a very great loss. Arie was my friend. I miss him. But my grief is greater when I think of what the church and world have lost. However, he has left us a legacy of writings and sermons in which the vision shines forth. His life was fruitful, indeed, but if we would return to his words and open ourselves to the Spirit that animated his vision, his life may prove even more fruitful in his death. He would not be the first for whom that is true. Arie has died; the vision must not die. References: Arie R. Brouwer. Ecumenical Testimony (Historical Series of the Reformed Church in America). Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1991. Arie R. Brouwer. Overcoming the Threat of Death: A Journal of One Christian’s Encounter With Cancer. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Arie R. Brouwer, Ecumenical Testimony, 1991, Overcoming the Threat of Death, 1994 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19940301 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1994-03-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource The Vision Must Not Die Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 1, 1994 entitled "The Vision Must Not Die", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 11-13. Tags: Ecumenical, Church, Diversity, Liturgy, Spirit, Reformed Tradition, Nature of Scripture. Scripture references: Arie R. Brouwer, Ecumenical Testimony, 1991, Overcoming the Threat of Death, 1994. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Church Diversity Ecumenical Liturgy Nature of Scripture Reformed Tradition Spirit https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/74362c1eae2c092fa2a66182e6759314.pdf 549f5dfc9440dca312e0f7a2725295ad PDF Text Text   Hermeneutics for Preaching: Approaches to Contemporary Interpretations of Scripture Raymond Bailey, editor (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992} By Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in The Princeton Seminary Bulletin, Volume XV, Number 2, New Series, 1994, pp. 230-231 This is an important volume because of its strong insistence on the necessity of executing the hermeneutical task in the preparation and delivery of the sermon. The insistence rules out a naive, “I simply preach the Bible.” Following an introductory chapter, “Hermeneutics: A Necessary Art,” by the contributing editor Raymond Bailey, there follow seven chapters, each describing a hermeneutical model, putting the model into practice in the interpretation of a biblical passage, issuing in a sermon on the passage exegeted, and concluding with a brief reflection on the whole process. The seven models described and put to use are as follows: historical, canonical, literary, rhetorical, African-American, philosophical, and theological. The format of these chapters is well conceived. Besides Bailey, six other writers contribute an essay and a sermon each. As is often the case in such collections, there is an uneven quality in the contributions. James Earl Massey executes the intention of the format most successfully with an excellent discussion of AfricanAmerican preaching and an equally excellent example of the hermeneutical perspective put into practice in the sermon. One hopes his review of black preaching might impact all preaching. The other sermons disappoint. Even though the volume as a whole and the individual contributions evidence a familiarity with hermeneutical theory and practice from Schleiermacher to Gadamer and Ricoeur, one fails to find the best insights of the respective models becoming fruitful in the sermons. Rather, the sermons for the most part smack of a kind of individualistic pietism that could be preached with little regard to the interpretive models set forth. The idea of the volume is excellent; the call to hermeneutical consciousness and responsibility imperative; the format is well conceived; the concrete execution is disappointing. © Grand Valley State University   � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Bailey, ed., Hermeneuticals for Preaching, 1992 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19940101 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1994-01-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Hermeneutics for Preaching: Approaches to Contemporary Interpretations of Scripture Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Princeton Seminary Bulletin Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1994 entitled "Hermeneutics for Preaching: Approaches to Contemporary Interpretations of Scripture", on the book Hermeneutics for Preaching: Approaches to Contemporary Interpretations of Scripture, written by by Raymond Bailey, editor , it appeared in The Princeton Seminary Bulletin, Vol. XV, No. 2, 1994 pp. 230-231. Tags: Preaching, Hermeneutics. Scripture references: Bailey, ed., Hermeneuticals for Preaching, 1992. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Hermeneutics Preaching https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f13c203c8ab368167affdf89cc3e622e.pdf 1ff1aca48475a49a4c18d189df6ac7cb PDF Text Text In Memoriam: The Reverend Dr. Arie R. Brouwer, 1935-1993 Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought December 1993, pp. 7-8 Dr. Arie Brouwer died at his home in Teaneck, New Jersey, on October 7, 1993. Arie had served in pastorates in the Reformed Church in America before moving to executive positions in the RCA denominational structure from 1968 to 1983, holding the top leadership position, General Secretary, from 1977 until he moved to Geneva, Switzerland, to serve the World Council of Churches as deputy general secretary in 1983-1984. He returned to this country to assume the position of general secretary of the National Council of Churches, which he held from 1985 to 1989. Arie had been asked to reorganize a failing, faltering National Council of Churches. Yet, as is often the case, the call for reform encountered strong opposition from entrenched power blocs with vested interests in maintaining an inviable status quo. In a speech before the governing board of the NCC, Arie dared to “speak truth to power,” setting forth his vision for the council's future through the restructuring he had been mandated to effect. With the governing board deadlocked and movement toward reconfiguration at an impasse, Arie resigned his position. Arie was sad at this turn of events but never doubted that he had done what he was charged to do—and, failing to effect the necessary reforms, he would not have been content simply to manage an institution in a maintenance mode, for the ecumenical vision of the Church of Christ was the passion of his life. That same passion plunged him into a new effort for justice and peace. Recognizing the critical nature of the Middle East conflict, Arie established Middle East Peacemakers. His hope was to lift the issues that divided Jew and Muslim, Israel and Palestine and the Arab states, in order to build bridges of reasoned discourse and understanding. © Grand Valley State University   �In Memoriam: Rev. Dr. Arie R. Brouwer Richard A. Rhem Page 2   And then in December of 1992, Arie was diagnosed with a serious cancer. During the struggle against the disease that finally took his life, he wrote several journal pieces that he shared with a circle of friends and that will soon be published by the World Council of Churches. In one entry he was asked what his faith meant to him in the midst of his illness. He responded: Long ago Horace Bushnell argued that children growing up in the church should never know themselves to be “other than a child of God.” That has been my experience. I recall it now in the hymns I especially treasured at various stages of my life, “Jesus Loves Me,” “What a Friend We Have in Jesus,” “God of the Prophets,” and “God of Grace and God of Glory.” From love through service to justice and hope, my whole life has been a love affair with God. I do not intend to give that up just because I have cancer. My last visit with my friend Arie Brouwer was on July 8 of this year in company with another mutual friend of college and seminary days, Dr. John Richard deWitt. For us all it was a sacred time as we reminisced and reflected together on the diverse ways of our pilgrimages. At one point I suggested that while our ways had become diverse over the years, we yet shared something very deep for we knew that we would each face our final moments in the same way, trusting the good and gracious God. There was a nod of agreement among us, acknowledgment of that deep trust that undergirded us all. It was a difficult parting. I was so poignantly aware of the wealth of experience, insight, wisdom, and gifts of leadership possessed by my friend, now a ghost of himself. He had so much to give to the church in these days of faltering structures—and to the world with whose presidents and prime ministers he had conversed. Three weeks before his death the event of the accord between Israel and the Palestinians energized him with hope and with a sense of what was now necessary in order to effect a lasting peace. Death came with a good deal of suffering, but finally as the strains of Handel's “Hallelujah Chorus” came to a close, Arie Brouwer bade good-by to his beloved wife, Harriet, and his daughter, Pat. He closed his eyes and moved from life through death into the presence of the Lord of life. Arie Brouwer has left us with a model of one who was a faithful servant of Jesus Christ, a fearless leader and spokesperson for truth and justice, a believer whose hope was undiminished in the face of death. His legacy is ours to examine and to act upon. We have lost a significant leader, but the years and fruit of that leadership will not be lost. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19931201 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993-12-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource In Memoriam: The Reverend Dr. Arie R. Brouwer, 1935-1993 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 1, 1993 entitled "In Memoriam: The Reverend Dr. Arie R. Brouwer, 1935-1993", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 6-7. Tags: Ecumenical, Interfaith, Hope. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Ecumenical Hope Interfaith https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/85aba223d3b2f92a6e7e791a8c2dd8d4.pdf 659494314d17a742939f4883366da7ef PDF Text Text   God Language: The Deeper Issue Article by Colette Volkema DeNooyer Minister of Faith Development and Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought March 1993, pp. 18-21 A decade ago, in the early 1980s, Richard Rhem preached a sermon entitled “The Gender of God: The Humanness of Jesus.” The message brought that day pointed to the wonder of the incarnation being not that God had visited us in male flesh but that God had “pitched a tent” in human flesh. Then in 1986, in this journal, Rhem developed that theme further in an article entitled “The Accident of the Incarnation” using accident in its philosophical sense of not belonging to the essence of the matter. Never in the decade of the eighties was there a ripple of consternation from the Christ Community congregation. That the incarnation transcended human gender differentiation seemed apparent to all. That God was not choosing maleness over against femaleness in this revelatory act appeared to stand uncontested. Then in the Epiphany season of 1992, we determined as a ministry team that the community’s commonly held biblical-theological understanding should find bolder and more obvious expression in both our worship experience and our liturgical forms. We had been sensitive to sexist language—using masculine pronouns less and less in prayers, sermons, and hymnody, publishing in bulletins our intention to be an inclusive community. But on a fateful Sunday morning in January we proposed that the community join us in addressing God as “Our Mother/Father who art in heaven...” The reaction from a vocal few was immediate and sharp. We had touched a nerve and discovered that many had not truly understood the implications of our earlier theological conclusions. We had been naive. A good friend, learning of the rumble we had caused and our dismay, chided us gently for failing to see that a little tinkering with language was © Grand Valley State University   �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 2   hardly sufficient to get at the larger issue of male domination in the church, reinforced perhaps by sexist language but hardly caused by it. He wrote, True, we need to change our language. But I am not as hopeful as you seem to be about language changes constructing a new social reality. An emergent reality (a true novum) will forge its own language (as has always happened, from the emergence of Christianity to Marxism), but I am not sure, especially in our age when we play fast and loose with words, that a reformation in language will bring a reformulation of social reality. Rescripting the present “paradigm” merely relieves points of potential rupture and allows the old story to continue. He was alerting us to the painful reality that little real change happens until there is a reduction to chaos. He cites Simone Weil who wrote of the necessity of “decreation.” His final shot was a suggestion that we fully engage the issue, for it might just be time for us all “to chaoticize, deconstruct, decreate.” After such a cogent puncturing of our noble project we were forced to plunge more deeply into the relationship of language and social reality. Our friend is quite right; we are dealing with a paradigm shift of major proportion. In Speaking the Christian God, Janet Martin Soskice cites Rosemary Radford Ruether making the point sharply: We cannot simply add the “mothering” to the “fathering” God, while preserving the same hierarchical patterns of male activity and female passivity. To vindicate the “feminine” in this form is merely to make God the sanctioner of patriarchy in a new form. (“The Female Nature of God,” Speaking the Christian God, 66) Soskice adds, Similarly, tinkering with the language of the liturgy, changing “he” to “he and she,” may be a cosmetic change which, from the feminists’ point of view, conceals a more profound and idolatrous teaching to pray to a male God. (Speaking the Christian God, 86) What this foray into language has revealed is the critical challenge that feminist theology throws out to the classical Trinitarian and Christological creedal formulations that came to expression in the philosophical language and conceptuality of the first five centuries of church history. Such an expression was a proper and necessary translation of the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth and the experience of the apostolic community, but it was a culturally conditioned translation fully as much as any contemporary theological formulation in the post-modem paradigm (e.g., liberation, black, or feminist theology). © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 3   Hans Küng contends that, ironically, it was Karl Barth who inaugurated the postmodern paradigm that is so explicitly grounded in human experience (the experience of suffering and oppression). Barth had turned sharply from experience as the ground for knowledge of God. His particular target was Schleiermacher, who grounded faith in God in the “feeling of absolute dependence.” Barth found the Protestant liberalism of the nineteenth century so in tune with European culture that there was no word of judgment or grace to address to the social chaos in the aftermath of the First World War. In his struggle to find a word for preaching, he wrestled with Paul’s “Letter to the Romans.” He found there the God who is “Wholly Other.” His conviction about the deceitfulness of human experience was confirmed when he witnessed his esteemed professors of theology sign on with Hitler’s National Socialism, the movement that led to the Second World War and the horrors of the Holocaust. His whole great theological project was posited on the conviction that only God reveals God; knowledge of God is the gift of God effected by the miracle of the Holy Spirit. Against Brunner he denied that there is anything in the human person that provides a “point of contact” for divine revelation. Such a radical position drew criticism. Bonhoeffer spoke of Barth’s theology as a “house without doors.” There was no way to get in if one were not already in. Bonhoeffer called it “Revelational Positivism.” Paradoxically, from the perspective of the present it is evident that Barth’s theology did not arise apart from his own personal, existential experience; it was precisely in reaction to that experience that his theology took shape! After Barth turned the tide of European theology in the first half of this century, the pendulum began to swing back to the pole of experience. In the revision of his Christian Faith (1985), Hendrikus Berkhof added one entirely new section— paragraph ten—entitled “Revelation and Experience.” The place of experience also played a considerable role in his Introduction to the Study of Dogmatics (1982). He points to some theologians through the centuries who have a special gift for sensing shifts taking place in a given culture and in human perception— people like Augustine, Luther, Wesley, Barth, and Küng, who experience existence very differently from previous generations. In such instances new experience calls forth a new language of faith. In former times such prophetic voices have been labeled heretical. But today there is a growing recognition and acceptance of a plurality of faith formulations. For, as Berkhof writes, “someone may be so driven by a series of experiences that his personal faith and theology affect the very nerve of the tradition of faith.” He speaks of “ahead-of-the-pack” thinking arising in recent decades from unexpected sources: The unheard-of phenomenon of groups of believers, previously not at all part of the dogmatic process, who began to intervene in it. Pacesetting dogmaticians ... giving expression to the faith in a way that was hardly recognizable to those who had learned to read the Bible from the perspective of a very different set of experiences… In their best works they © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 4   give evidence of new discoveries made in Scripture. To the “official” practitioners of dogmatics they pose the question of what unconscious conditioning factors have had their distorting or inspiring effect on them. (26) We have come to recognize that it is not enough to refer to Scripture, the creedal tradition, and the transconfessional dimensions of ecumenicity “as the funding sources of dogmatics.” This becomes evident when these are held in common, yet opposite experiences may make our respective interpretations of the gospel mutually unintelligible. This is, of course, the flash point of contemporary controversy. Berkhof raises the question, “[I]s it our duty radically to exclude the factor of our life experiences?” But he then further asks, “Who can jump over his own shadow?” Of course we cannot. The call for contextual theology has simply made us aware of our own contextuality—the fact that no theology arises out of a cultural vacuum devoid of experience. In reference to the claims of Third World theologians and First World feminist theologians for whom experience is the key to theological understanding, Berkhof contends, We cannot cancel out their bewilderment by proclaiming: “Not what we say is important but what the Scripture says” or the question is, “Who is Christ himself?” All our central words such as “salvation,” “Christ,” “Church,” and “Scripture,” have a much more contextual shape and focus than we are aware of. (71-72) Rosemary Radford Ruether in her seminal work, Sexism and God-Talk (1983), asserts: What have been called the objective sources of theology; scripture and tradition are themselves codified collective human experience. She further declares: Human experience is the starting point and the ending point of the hermeneutical circle. Codified tradition both reaches back to roots in experience and is constantly renewed or discarded through the test of experience. “Experience” includes experience of the divine, experience of oneself, and experience of the community and the world, in an interacting dialectic. Received symbols, formulas, and laws are either authenticated or not through their ability to illuminate and interpret experience. Systems of authority try to reverse this relation and make received symbols dictate what can be experienced as well as the interpretation of that which is experienced. In reality, the relation is the opposite. If a symbol does not © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 5   speak authentically to experience, it becomes dead or must be altered to provide a new meaning. (12-13) What the feminists have uncovered is the sociology of theological knowledge putting the lie to the claim that its ground is an objective, divine, and universal authority apart from human experience. Here, of course, we arrive at a watershed of understanding. With our present knowledge of the development of dogma, our knowledge of that process in the early centuries of creedal formulation with the intervention of emperors and the political motivation of popes and patriarchs, one can hardly deny an historically conditioned understanding of all theological formulation. In Theology for the Third Millennium, Hans Küng reminds us that new prophetic traditions are not born in a cultural vacuum. New paradigms, while incorporating the truth of the old paradigm, break through with new revelatory insight. Then at some point in the process this new insight comes under the control of leaders who institutionalize the inaugurating vision. A series of criteria are imposed to determine the correct interpretive line, and soon the new paradigm begins to ossify. If, however, present experience is sidelined or denied a place in the continued development of theological understanding, those for whom the symbols no longer illumine their experience of being human may well drop out, abandoning the faith of their foremothers and forefathers. Janet Soskice asks, “Does the ‘father God’ have a future?” She answers: If Christianity has a future, then the answer is probably “yes.” But it would be reasonable for a dispassionate student of religions to wonder whether Christianity will survive the rapid changes taking place—around the world, not just in the privileged West—in women’s self-understanding. In my opinion, Christianity now faces a serious challenge, and one that addresses core metaphors, narratives, and ideologies. ... It may be that Christianity will not meet the challenge or will linger on as a pleasing anachronism distant from the life of the cultures it inhabits. You may well think we are watching yet another stage in the death throes of a dinosaur. (Speaking the Christian God, 94) Christian faith need not die unless we cling to symbols and forms that no longer mediate the truth in compelling fashion, idolizing the medium and confusing it for the message itself. In his journal, Morning Light, Jean Sulivan writes, Your certitudes—are you so blind? What are they generally based on? The failure to deepen your knowledge. We rush past questions in order to avoid anxiety.... Some weep for the certitudes of the past. We must preserve, they say, this or that which was beautiful and good. Perhaps that’s true, but those who © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 6   complain like that are weeping for themselves. In the last analysis, we shouldn’t weep but create. Gothic churches were built over Romanesque structures, which were built over pagan fountains and temples. To create is the only important thing, to rediscover the fervor that produced the thing you’re weeping for. (123-24) The legitimate place of experience in theological formulations given voice by Küng, Berkhof, Ruether, and Sulivan among others seems to us beyond refute. But refuted it is. An example is Speaking the Christian God, subtitle: “The Holy Trinity and the Challenge of Feminism,” eighteen essays addressing the question of the use of Father as a designation for God. Covering the spectrum from moderate to strident, the necessity of the Father designation is defended as the sine qua non of classical, Western, Trinitarian theology, indeed of Christian faith. This is an excellent collection of essays for identifying that the stakes in the feminist challenge run deeper than a superficial adjustment of pronouns. What is maintained almost uniformly throughout from various perspectives—language theory, worship, as well as creedal formulation—is that feminist claims must be denied because they undercut cherished creedal paradigms as well as a traditional orthodox reading of Scripture. Without the slightest apology or concession for possible human fallibility, the opinions of Church Fathers and early Christian councils are cited as pronouncements of eternal and divine truth. Present experience of ecumenical councils, popes, bishops and church leaders would seem to alert us to the ever-present political and personal agendas that dog very human leaders. Our contemporary understanding of parliamentary procedures and authorized committee reports should caution us that as Ernest Campbell has noted, “There was a lot of good stuff left on the cutting room floor!” Many of the writers in Speaking the Christian God seem to forget that the distance of centuries removes us from the passionate conviction of the opposition’s arguments as well as votes that at times were almost too close to call. That is precisely the claim of Reuther. And her exegetical work is impressive. It is remarkable that the appeal for preserving the Father designation in Christian usage in Speaking the Christian God is replete with references to the writings of the Church Fathers and the ecumenical councils but wrestles little with biblical material. The defenders of the classic creedal formulations have not gone back far enough! In absolutizing the formulations of the post-apostolic period when the gospel moved out into a Hellenistic world, the writers in Speaking the Christian God attribute an authority to those formulations that failed to recognize that these were already translations of the revelatory events. These formulations pulsated with passionate human experience in a cultural context that supplied the linguistic and philosophical tools by which to bring that experience to expression. But the experience of the post-apostolic age is hardly ours, and the language and philosophical conceptuality are alien to us on the threshold of the third millennium. © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 7   Stephen M. Smith in “Worldview, Language, and Radical Feminism: An Evangelical Appraisal,” (one of the essays in Speaking the Christian God) writes that we live in a time of massive cultural conflict. This conflict, he says, “is in reality a clash of worldviews.” Right! And is it not about time? There was no significant threat to the philosophical worldview within which the classic creedal formulation came to expression until the eighteenth century. But consider what has happened since. Not only have there been revolutionary breakthroughs in our understanding of the physical universe, but even more significant for our present focus, the rise of historical thinking has illumined the process of development of human understanding. Could it be that the classic paradigms, once the Spirit’s medium for the revealing of the living God, must be dismantled to make room for a new paradigm that takes up the truth of the old but makes space for the emergence of the new? One theologian who is seeking to bring to expression a new understanding of God in light of contemporary experience is Sallie McFague. She receives sharp criticism from Smith for holding a monist world view, which she acknowledges, but in the sense of panentheism, which The Oxford Dictionary of the Christum Church defines as “the belief that the Being of God includes and penetrates the whole universe, so that every part of it exists in him, but (as against pantheism) that his Being is more than, and is not exhausted by, the universe.” The issue must not be whether McFague challenges and undercuts the orthodox world view, but whether or not her models of God are able to illumine more adequately our present human experience as she wrestles with the biblical story and the revelation that was en-fleshed in Jesus. In her probings, McFague is engaged in the very process that is the responsibility of every serious theologian—testing the received tradition and bringing it to fresh expression. Otherwise dogmatics becomes fundamentalist, the mere reiteration of formulations that illumined yesterday’s experiences, and that is idolatry. A much more sympathetic reading of McFague comes from James Fowler who writes, She ... makes clear that we require new metaphors if our faith is to enable us to make sense of our contemporary experiences.... In our religious language we are naming ourselves, one another, our world, and our relatedness to God in terms from bygone times. Such anachronistic names, helpful in earlier times, are distorting and hurtful now. (Weaving the New Creation, 61) Brian Wren, a minister in the Reformed Church of England is well known as a writer of meaningful contemporary hymnody. In his book What Language Shall I Borrow? he addresses the concerns and issues that motivated him to write such hymns as “Bring Many Names,” in which he expands our language horizons by referring to God as: © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 8   Strong mother God, working night and day, Planning all the wonders of creation... Warm father God, hugging every child, feeling all the strains of human living... Old aching God, grey with endless care, calmly piercing evil’s new disguises... Young, growing God, eager, on the move, seeing all, and fretting at our blindness ... Great, living God, never fully known, joyful darkness far beyond our seeing ... The poem that opens What Language Shall I Borrow? a poem written by Wren, sums up his understanding that language can be one step in the process of freeing ourselves from idolatrous attachment to earlier faith expressions. The Main Question If every naming of God is a borrowing from human experience, And if language slants and angles our thinking and behavior; And if our society makes qualities labeled “feminine” inferior to qualities labeled “masculine,” forming women and men with identities steeped in those labelings, in structures where men are still dominant though shaken and women still subordinate though seeking emancipation... Then it follows that using only male language (“he,” “king,” “father”) to name and praise God powerfully affects our encounter with God and our thinking and behavior; So that we must then ask © Grand Valley State University �God Language: The Deeper Issue, Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Page 9   whether male dominance and female subordination and seeking God only in male terms are God’s intention or human distortion and sin; For if these things are indeed a deep distortion and sin, So that women and men are called to repent together from domination and subordination, Then how can we name and praise God in ways less idolatrous, more freeing, and more true to the Triune God and the direction of love in the Anointed One, Jesus? His prolific production of hymns for worship is his answer to “The Main Question.” And that brings us back to where we began. The letter from our friend is full of profound insight—a little cosmetic tinkering with the language of worship is not enough. We have to do with a far more profound issue, indeed, with the necessity of a whole new paradigm for our speaking of God. And that will probably come about only through chaos and decreation. But in the meantime it is not unimportant to watch our language as a sign that the Christian community is honestly listening for the ways in which God may be coming to us through the voices of experience. References: Henrikus Berkhof. Introduction to the Study of Dogmatics. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985. Rosemary Radford Ruether. Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Beacon Press, 0010 Anniversary edition, 1993. Janet Martin Soskice, “The Female Nature of God” in Speaking the Christian God: Holy Trinity and the Challenge of Feminism. (Editor Alvin F. Kimel). William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., first edition, 1992. Brian Wren. What Language Shall I Borrow?: God-Talk in Worship: A Male Response to Feminist Theology. First published 1989; Wipf & Stock Pub., 2009. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Hendrikus Berkhof, Introduction to the Study of Dogmatics, 1989, Rosemary R. Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk, 1993, Janet M. Soskice in Speaking the Christian God, 1992, Brian Wren, What Language Shall I Borrow?, 2009 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19930301 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993-03-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource God Language: The Deeper Issue Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Colette Volkema DeNooyer & Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 1, 1993 entitled "God Language: The Deeper Issue", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 18-21. Tags: Nature of God, Creeds, Historical Thinking, Metaphors for God, Nature of Religious Development, Theological Paradigms. Scripture references: Hendrikus Berkhof, Introduction to the Study of Dogmatics, 1989, Rosemary R. Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk, 1993, Janet M. Soskice in Speaking the Christian God, 1992, Brian Wren, What Language Shall I Borrow?, 2009. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Creeds Historical Thinking Metaphors for God Nature of God Nature of Religious Development Theological Paradigms https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bd409e4b0ac831607e1014339fba5651.pdf 3aa0fa32066e21470ff6490fadc3df92 PDF Text Text The Book That Binds Us Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought December 1992, pp. 12-17 The Bible is the book that binds conservative Reformed orthodoxy, binds not in the sense of holding us together but, rather, in the sense of shackling us, immobilizing us as we attempt to address the Word of God—the Word of judgment and grace—to our contemporary situation, to present human experience. The 1992 Synod of the Christian Reformed Church, in its anguishing debate and failure to move forward on the question of women in office, is only the most recent instance of our inability to bring the scriptural witness into fruitful dialogue with present human experience and the knowledge and insight available to us from the various disciplines of human research. The Bible is being misused. It is being asked to function in a way it can no longer be expected to function, a way it was never intended to function. Until there is a radical revisioning of our understanding of the place of Scripture in shaping our faith and forming our practice, the church will be deadlocked, at an impasse, firing salvos of accusation and recrimination from opposing camps while the body bleeds and languishes. It is painful to read the account of the Christian Reformed drama as it has taken shape over the past two years since the Synod of 1990. A similar drama was played out in the past in the Reformed Church in America, which now has opened its offices to women but continues to be a house divided, living in a coexistence filled with dis-ease. Advocates of both positions in the Christian Reformed Church cite Scripture and claim to be faithful to its authority. But a great gulf separates the two sides, and it is difficult to imagine them reaching agreement. Cultural…climate of opinion does work its ferment on the staunchest of orthodoxies, and time is on the side of those who seek to open the offices to women. That will come. But the Christian Reformed Church will be much like the RCA at present—of two minds on the issue. The church will live with a pragmatic © Grand Valley State University   �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 2   accommodation but without a unified, joyful vision of truth, of justice, energized by fresh insight and understanding. In this journal April 1991,I wrote, In theology old paradigms keep their adherents even when theological development has left them behind. But they can do so only by some form of authoritarian claim. In the case of Reformed orthodoxy, the authoritarian claim of the Bible has held theological movement hostage, hindering meaningful dialogue with the sciences and philosophy. We are theologically stuck, and we will not become unstuck until we learn to value Scripture as authority, but break loose from its authoritarian use. In that same article I referred to a statement of Hendrikus Berkhof in his Two Hundred Years of Theology that Herman Bavinck turned away from dogmatic theology in his later years, sensing that the modern period needed a much more vigorous renewal of theology than he was able to produce. And I raised the question whether he might not have recognized that his own objective principle of knowledge—the Scriptures—blocked him from fruitful engagement with the rapidly expanding horizons of knowledge in the modern period. I stated again that the orthodox Reformed view of Scripture and its hermeneutic make it impossible either to engage the cultural assumptions that are the legacy of the Enlightenment or to be in dialogue with the probings of the present, postmodern period. The current dilemma of the Christian Reformed Church confirms my contention. The question of women's ordination cannot be solved by appeal to Scripture alone. What must be recognized is that the Bible is not a book of propositional truths, timeless and eternal, covering the full spectrum of cosmic reality, to be applied objectively to questions of faith and practice. Rather, it must always be heard as a cumulative witness of those encountered by the God of Creation who came in judgment and grace to Israel and in the humanity of Jesus. The canon of Scripture includes that witness spanning centuries, but the canon has been closed for subsequent centuries to the present while the human story has continued on with dramatic development and amazing breakthroughs in the understanding of the cosmos, of historical development, and of the human person. In the present debate in the Christian Reformed Church we can see the failure on both sides to acknowledge the legitimate place of contemporary experience in the discussion of women's ordination. Each side is claiming biblical authority for its position. Obviously, something is wrong, and what is wrong is the view, shared by the opposing sides, of how the Bible functions in such a discussion in relation to present experience. It is my contention that the failure to engage contemporary experience stems from a failure to recognize the function of a living tradition of faith. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 3   Let me say clearly, I stand unreservedly with those who advocate opening all ecclesiastical offices to women. They can mount a biblical case for their position. But their opponents can mount an equally strong argument against women's ordination if it is assumed that the Bible must provide the answer for or against that ordination. It is clear that what is at issue is not women as women in office, their giftedness, leadership capacity, or spirituality. The issue is the Bible, how it functions in the life of the church, where its authority lies. Until the church wrestles with the authority of Scripture in determining the shape of its faith and the form of its practice, it will not be able to make progress on any theological front or come to consensus on any doctrinal debate. The apparent issue being debated will never be the real issue; lying behind it will always lurk the question, “But what does this do to the authority of the Bible?” In Reformed orthodoxy, the Bible carries not only authority; it is used with authoritarian coerciveness and uncritical literalness that brings every new discussion to an impasse whether the question be the ordination of women, the status of homosexual or lesbian persons, of creation versus evolution, of ethical issues such as abortion, genetic engineering, or euthanasia. In Bondage to the Bible The Bible is the book that binds us. In our academic, theological institutions we acknowledge that the Bible is not a scientific text, not a chronicle of history in the modern sense of historiography, that it comes to expression through human persons with all the limitations that entails. But we have never been honest with the church about the implications of our recognition of the nature of the Bible. Somehow the critical study of Scripture, the results of two hundred years of intensive study of its formation and its contents, has never trickled down to the people. We have continued living in the paradigm of Protestant orthodoxy deriving from the Protestant scholasticism of the seventeenth century. By that time both the Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches had battened down the hatches and set themselves against the emergence of Renaissance humanism, which came to full flower in the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century. Rightfully, the church resisted the drive for human autonomy and the enthronement of human reason, but it fought fire with fire; the theological enterprise took on a strongly rationalistic character and attempted in intellectual formulation to ground certainty, buttressed by an authoritarian church (Roman Catholic) or an authoritarian Scripture (Protestant). The historical-critical study of Scripture created a crisis for the churches of the Reformation, and a battle ensued that our churches have yet to settle. It is incredible, in light of what is widely recognized about the nature of the © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 4   Scriptures, that there should be such a prevalence of literalism in our understanding of the Bible. In his Dynamics of Faith, Tillich distinguishes two stages of literalism. The first is the “natural stage” before making a clear distinction between the symbolic and the factual; it consists “in the inability to separate the creations of symbolic imagination from the facts which can be verified through observation and experiment.” This represents the first naiveté, and such literalism creates no problem for the mediation of meaning. But when the symbol system is broken or seriously undercut in the continuing growth of knowledge and understanding, to continue to assert literal correspondence between symbol and fact is to fall into a “reactive literalism.” Literalism in this second stage is “aware of the questions but represses them, half consciously, half unconsciously.” This path is chosen by “people who prefer the repression of their questions to the uncertainty which appears with the breaking of the myth.” Reactive literalism cramps the figurative language of the Bible into the narrow framework of interpretation appropriate only to the literal usage of modern science. The desire is for certainty, but not, as Barth says, the certainty of faith that is given and given again, but the certainty of human control. Identifying the Bible with revelation, elevating the doctrine of inspiration so that the written word is inerrant and the truth infallible represents a “lust for certitude.” That phrase comes from Charles Davis. In his Temptations of Religion he discusses the social construction of all human knowledge, which excludes the possibility of “a revelation insofar as that implies an a priori claim to absoluteness and universality.” He contends, Revelation in that sense is given as an absolute in the order of knowledge; it is regarded as a set of unquestionable data, from which all opinions may be evaluated. It represents an attempt to limit criticism, to put a stop to the endless questioning of human thinking by establishing an a-critical point, a point not subject to criticism because beyond criticism. (18) To reject revelation in that sense is not, he claims, to exclude God's manifestation in our midst in word and event. It is, however, to exclude an a priori absoluteness and universality as violating human intelligence and freedom. Davis quotes Peter Berger: The theologian is consequently deprived of the psychologically liberating possibility of either radical commitment or radical negation. What he is left with, I think, is the necessity for a step-by-step re-evaluation of the traditional affirmations in terms of his own cognitive criteria (which need not necessarily be those of a putative “modern consciousness”). Is this or that in the tradition true? Or is it false? I don't think that there are shortcut answers to such questions, neither by means of “leaps of faith” nor by the methods of any secular discipline. (The Sacred Canopy, 187) © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Davis recognizes how fearful such a recognition of the social construction of our reality is. To become conscious of the extent to which our “knowledge” and “values” are social fictions is “to look into the abyss, the void, surrounding human life in every direction.” Such honest recognition is very rare in the church; rather, theologians and preachers reinforce reactive literalism, feeding the lust for certitude. But should there not be an honest facing of what is widely recognized in our postmodern world—that human knowledge is socially constructed and symbolically expressed? When we do so, we are faced with an alternative. According to Davis, We can respond to the nothingness by a nihilism that interprets it as chaos, as meaninglessness, as the ultimate absurdity making everything absurd. Or we can respond to the void as positive nothingness, as mystery. That is the religious response. Faith in the last analysis is a basic trust in reality, an openness to mystery, a being drawn toward the abyss in selfforgetfulness and awe and love. Faith acknowledges the relativities of finite human existence without the nihilistic denial that these do, however gropingly, lead us toward absolute meaning and value. (21) The Bipolar Reality of Scripture And Present Experience The Bible contains the words of those in Israel and in the event of Jesus Christ who were encountered by God in judgment and grace, who witnessed to the Word of gracious salvation more or less adequately in their stammering words and historically conditioned understanding. But God is not dead. God still encounters us. God's Spirit still illumines the human understanding, not only in reference to the biblical witness but in the larger landscape of human experience. In the ongoing life of the church we must take seriously not only the Bible but also authentic contemporary experiences of being human in this world. We are people rooted in history, creatures of the cosmos, whose secrets scientists are probing, bringing to light fascinating findings. What of our knowledge of history and the awesome development of human knowledge in the respective disciplines of science? Because it lies outside the Bible's primary focus and purpose, is it therefore of no account in shaping our faith and forming our practice? Is it reasonable to assume that we can engage critical questions of ultimate human concern and determine crucial action and behavior as a human family living together on Spaceship Earth by reference alone to the Bible? It is precisely the theologian's task to coordinate the bipolar reality of Scripture and present human experience. Theology performs a hermeneutical function; its task is to interpret the biblical tradition in the present context of the church's life—an ongoing process that is never finished, always provisional, necessarily open-ended. All interpretation is a mediation of past and present within the history of a faith tradition. And the present is a moving target. Breaking the Impasse: Scripture and Tradition © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 6   How can the church move forward with theological discussion that will illumine contemporary human experience and shape the faith and practice of God's people in the image of Jesus Christ? What connects the canonical biblical witness to the present? What forms the bridge between the revelatory events in Israel's history and in Jesus Christ—to which the biblical story witnesses—and our present experience of being human in this world? We need a new understanding of the place of the living tradition of faith as lived out in the community of faith. We must recognize the elements at play here: the revelatory events, the witness to those events in the biblical canon, the church as the community constituted by that witness and the place of ongoing witness, and the whole spectrum of human knowledge and cumulative historical experience that continues to grow and develop. As I engage anxious folk in our churches who fear faith is being diluted and biblical Christianity is being jeopardized, I get the impression they assume that there was a time of pristine revelation infallibly recorded in the writings of the New Testament and that apostolic truth was rather quickly overlaid with church tradition that distorted that truth. Then, it is claimed, in the Reformation of the sixteenth century, the apostolic Christian faith was recovered and brought to expression in its original clarity in the creeds and confessions of the church, reformed according to the Word of God. That is a delusion, a colossal distortion of the way of the gospel in the church over nearly two thousand years. Yet it is still cavalierly asserted for popular consumption. A more accurate portrayal of the situation must recognize the interpretation of the revelatory events in Israel and in Jesus Christ by the witnesses to those revelatory events; that interpretation was instrumental in constituting a faith community. That faith community (Israel and the church) was formed out of the witness to revelation and, in its ongoing life, that community reinterpreted its understanding of the original revelatory events and continued to translate its faith understanding in ever new historical circumstances. We can trace the process already in the canonical Scriptures. For example, Israel's faith is reinterpreted by the prophetic word in terms of Israel's ongoing historical experience. Development can also be seen within the New Testament in Christological understanding. The primitive Christology of Acts is not at all the full-blown incarnational Christology of the fourth gospel. With the setting of the limits of the canon, such reinterpretation and development did not cease. We distinguish the biblical witness from the postcanonical tradition, but it was a historical decision of the church that determined the breakpoint. And the lines are blurred. Common agreement as to the canonical books was not reached until around a.d. 400. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 7   The problem of the canon reopened at the time of the Reformation. The Protestant churches excluded the Apocrypha, a whole series of Old Testament writings that had been recognized as canonical for over a thousand years. Luther, in his September Bible of 1552, openly separated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the other New Testament writings, thereby constituting a dual canon. Erasmus questioned the authenticity and authority of Hebrews, James, Jude, and 2 and 3 John. Zwingli thought Revelation should be rejected, and Calvin's expositions cover every book except Revelation. In the introduction to his commentaries it is clear, according to Barth, that he had doubts not only about the books mentioned by Luther, but also concerning 2 Peter and 2 and 3 John. The history of the canon indicates a shifting and a questioning that denies the possibility of a claim of absolute certainty regarding its limits. But even within the present Protestant canon we can see the process of translation and reinterpretation of the faith traditions, as stated above, and that process has never ceased. The preaching of the church is the bridgehead where the biblical text comes to contemporary expression. The heart of the preaching task is the hermeneutical moment when the words of the text that witness to the Word that once sounded find fresh expression in the hope that through the preacher's stammering words the Word might again be heard—that the living God might speak here and now. Every historical formulation is provisional; to absolutize an interpretation at any point on the historical continuum is idolatry. The historically conditioned interpretations of the Christian faith through the centuries vary in the degree to which they express a faithful interpretation of the originating revelatory events in Israel and in Jesus Christ, in the degree to which the original revelatory luminousness shines through. Sometimes there is clarity, sometimes distortion. There is action and reaction; the pendulum swings. In the nineteenth century the climate of opinion dominated by Newtonian physics and historicism smothered the witness to the newness and freedom of God's engagement with our world. Against a truncated, liberal faith expression, Barth boldly proclaimed the “Wholly Other,” the God who shatters “our little systems.” In the wake of the renewal of the church and the rediscovery of God's liberating grace in the sixteenth century, Reformed orthodoxy fell into the sterility and rigidity of Scholasticism. It absolutized its interpretation of the faith as though it were a statement of timeless and eternal truth unalloyed with the cultural assumptions of its day. Reformed orthodoxy failed to recognize that this interpretation was forged out of the crisis created by the ascendancy of rationalism as the Enlightenment was coming to flower, and so it declared the autonomy of the human person and human reason as the measure of truth. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 8   What we must recognize is the constant interplay of the biblical witness and contemporary interpretation and the fact that we are part of a faith community that is living out of and carrying forward a living faith tradition. We have an anchor in the past; the church has demarcated certain writings as canonical. Present interpretation of the Christian faith and shaping of Christian practice will always involve serious listening to the biblical witness. But the present determination of faith and practice will not treat the intervening centuries between biblical times and our own as a vacuum. The history of the transmission of the faith will also be mined for wisdom, insight, and guidance. But neither do we live in a vacuum. Our contemporary expression of the faith and the shaping of our practice will finally have to be our truth. Finally, our witness and life must be authentically our own, our voice bringing to expression the living tradition. Jaroslav Pelikan differentiates that sense of the living tradition from traditionalism. Tradition, he says, is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. If we would move forward in our understanding of all reality before the face of God, we must come to a new appreciation of the living tradition of biblical faith as a dynamic movement. Hendrikus Berkhof acknowledges that as a rule Protestant dogmatics has no separate chapter on tradition. But this disregard of the concept of tradition cannot be maintained, he argues. In Christian Faith he writes, Revelation means that God enters the field of history to bring about an encounter with men which transcends human history, and which therefore goes far beyond the temporal spatial bounds of the original field of revelation. The encounters which took place at that time were means and suited for leading to further encounter in other times and places. Hence the revelation of Christ in the New Testament, in spite of, or rather because of its definitive nature, is not the end but calls forth as its sequel the coming and the work of the Spirit. The Spirit proceeds from Christ to continue and interpret his saving work world-wide. This coming of the Spirit is a new redemptive act, of the same importance as the coming of Christ of which he is the complement and counterpart. It is one continuous revelational event. Fixation without interpretive transmission petrifies the faith…. Berkhof contends that if the concern of revelation is the continuing encounter between God and humankind, then tradition is theologically of the same importance as Scripture. The redemptive work of God must be “handed over,” faithful to the fixated form (Scripture) but verbalized such that it becomes intelligible in other times and places. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 9   The current impasse in the conservative Reformed churches is the result of fixation with the biblical writings and a failure born of fear to find fresh expression for contemporary faith. Sola Scriptura. That was the clarion call, the battle cry of the reformers. Faith will be shaped, practice formed by reference to Scripture alone. The claim can be easily understood given the historical context, and the return to Scripture as the authoritative witness to revelation proved fruitful in the life of the church. But there was a loss as well: it was the sense of tradition as the living, ongoing, mediating, and interpreting expression of biblical faith as it is confessed and lived in the community of faith, the church. Tradition. In Fiddler on the Roof Tevye booms out the word claiming that life is as precarious as a fiddler making music on a perilously steep roof and that balance is maintained by tradition. According supremacy to tradition over Scripture in the Roman Catholic Church allowed it to drift from testing its faith and practice by the Word of God and to lose the clear sound of the gospel. Tradition and Scripture were a dual source of authority, but tradition had the ascendancy. The recovery of the authority of Scripture to exercise its critical function was a great contribution of the Reformation. But such movements as the Reformation are reactionary; often there is such a strong reaction to the status quo being attacked that the pendulum swings too far. How does the cumulative, growing experience of humankind become incorporated into faith's vision and practice? The witness of prophets and apostles continues to be heard in the pages of the Bible. But what of the ongoing encounter of God's Spirit with the church as it moves through history confronted by new questions, immersed in circumstances beyond that of the biblical world? It is in the living tradition of the faith community that new experience and fresh discoveries are brought into dialogue with the biblical witness. The tradition, like a fiery river of lava, moves with the current of history, a stream continuous with the erupting volcano, yet ever moving through new landscapes. This function of tradition was brought home sharply to me by the New Testament scholar Krister Stendahl, who joined Rabbi David Hartman in an all-day, JewishChristian dialogue on the theme “Faithful Interpretation.” Stendahl spoke of tradition as an instrument of continuity and change. Continuity was obvious to me; tradition connects backward to the past. But is tradition an instrument of change? Indeed, he argued. By means of the tradition we enter the new and negotiate the future. Stendahl spoke warmly and charmingly of a visit to Swedish relatives in Minnesota. There he experienced life as he remembered it in Sweden when he was a child and visited his grandparents. In Minnesota the Swedish tradition is frozen, as is true in most immigrant ethnic communities. If you want to see a piece of Sweden past, he said, visit Minnesota, for there the tradition has become a museum piece. But Stendahl has recently returned to the United States after © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page10   serving for a time in Stockholm as Bishop of the Swedish Lutheran Church. If you want to experience the living tradition of the Swedish people, you must go to Sweden where the dynamic tradition is continuing to evolve, he pointed out. Stendahl offered a vivid image: a boa constrictor periodically wriggles out of its skin, leaving the skin behind, an empty shell. He pictured a biologist taking the skin, measuring it, analyzing it, and then having it stuffed and mounted—a museum piece. Someone exclaims, “There's a snake!” But, says Stendahl, that's not the snake. The snake has wriggled out and away and is still living—in new skin—still making history. The living tradition of Christian faith is the contemporary reinterpretation of the biblical witness in light of the cumulative historical experience of the church and the growing store of human knowledge. In Words Around the Table, Gail Ramshaw writes, Tradition is not like an obsolete edition of the encyclopedia, full of half facts, and old prejudices. Tradition is not like a 1948 etiquette book that lists the activities and even the fabrics forbidden a widow in deep mourning: All we can do is grimace and ignore it. The tradition of the church lives. We can read medieval books being discussed, we can unearth attitudes that were subsequently buried, we can make tradition different tomorrow than it was yesterday or today. Where “tradition” repeats tired slogans out of context, when “tradition” yells louder and louder to drown out queries, it becomes a sarcophagus that the dying church deserves. But when tradition is the history of the movement of the Spirit, darting here, hiding there, migrating halfway around the world, it can serve as one expression of God's Truth. As much as any contemporary theologian, David Tracy has addressed the question of the faithful interpretation of the Christian tradition to make it accessible to a serious and reasonable public. As I have been contending, he sees systematic theology's task to interpret, mediate, and translate the meaning and truth of the continuing living tradition in dialogue with the biblical witness in light of present human experience. Where this is not the case, the notion of authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for the obedient will. Then theologians can no longer interpret and translate the tradition but “only repeat the shop-worn conclusions of the tradition.” Eventually, the central, classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition become mere “fundamentals” to be externally accepted and endlessly repeated. (Analogical Imagination, 99) In an earlier work, Blessed Rage for Order, Tracy calls for a revisioning of the Christian tradition. He explains: © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page11   [T]he revisionist theologian is committed to what seems clearly to be the central task of contemporary Christian theology: the dramatic confrontation, the mutual illuminations and corrections, the possible basic reconciliations between the principal values, cognitive claims, and existential faiths of both a reinterpreted post-modern consciousness and a reinterpreted Christianity. (32) The revisionist theologian is not motivated by the desire for relevance, Tracy argues. Rather, The reality of the situation is both more simple and more basic: when all is said and done, one finds that he can authentically abandon neither his faith in the modern experiment, nor his faith in the God of Jesus Christ. (4) The church lives in a creative tension because it lives in a bipolar reality of Bible and present experience, an ancient faith and the undeniable reality of the modern experiment. We need a new understanding of the Bible and a new appreciation of tradition if we would be faithful to the Word and present to our world. In An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, John Henry Newman describes the church, tradition, the cosmos itself after the manner of an organism. Their development is seen as an organic process. This view was in contrast to a fundamentalistic view that regards revelation and tradition as a fixed, unchanging body of truths and rejects all change and pluralism. Newman was able to accommodate ongoing human experience in his organic view of tradition. In What Is Living, What is Dead in Christianity Today? Charles Davis comments on Newman's view: The result was a concept of tradition as cumulative experience, subject therefore to change whether as development or as decline, which distinguished [him] as conservative, from reactionaries, who did not acknowledge history and development. In a religious context the conservatives... were those who saw tradition as a dynamic process rather than as a static deposit. (33) This is not enough for Davis to meet the situation we face today. He calls for a more radical revisioning of faith, raising the question, Are we not in a situation that cannot be met by an orderly development of traditional categories; but which demands something radically new? (34) One may lean more to Newman's view of a growing organic process or to Davis's with his call for radical revisioning, but the option not open to an honest facing of the present crisis of the church is a conception of the Bible, theological © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page12   formulation, and Christian practice as fixed, into which contemporary human experience and present human knowledge on all fronts must be crammed. In a recent issue of Context, Martin Marty lifts a quotation from Newman from Ian Ker's Newman on Being a Christian. Marty writes, “With development and change in mind—over against a static picture of God, the human, faith, and doctrine—we read: It is indeed sometimes said that the stream is clearest near the spring. Whatever use may fairly be made of this image, it does not apply to the history of a philosophy or belief, which on the contrary is more equable, and purer, and stronger, when its bed has become deep, and broad, and full. It necessarily rises out of an existing state of things, and for a time savours of the soul. Its vital element needs disengaging from what is foreign and temporary.... It remains perhaps for a time quiescent; it tries, as it were, its limbs, and proves the ground under it, and feels its way. From time to time it makes essays which fail, and are in consequence abandoned. It seems in suspense which way to go; it wavers, and at length strikes out in one definite direction. In time it enters upon strange territory; points of controversy alter their bearing; parties rise and fall around it; dangers and hopes appear in new relations; and old principles reappear under new forms. It changes with them in order to remain the same. In a higher world it is otherwise, but here below to live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often. References: © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19921201 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-12-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource The Book That Binds Us Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 1, 1992 entitled "The Book That Binds Us", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 12-17. Tags: Authority of Scripture, Experience, Faith Tradition, Critical Thinking, Faith, Mystery. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Authority of Scripture Critical Thinking Experience Faith Faith Tradition Mystery https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/98826b791b8335a577b40a24441d8d1f.pdf 4f89485f5759cb8a57dc7c293481ccdd PDF Text Text An Alternative To Church As Usual Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought September 1991, pp. 12-15 Our discussion went on for nearly two hours. The pain in ministry was expressed in example after example. Pastors—competent, committed, working hard, even loved and respected by the community—were nonetheless seeing little or no church growth; the traditional congregation in instance after instance was dying. I was one of only two pastors in the circle; the others served the church in the academy. Finally, the group leader turned to me and said, “In all of this discussion about the pain of ministry and grim prospects for the church, you’ve not said anything.” It was true; I had said nothing. I am not unaware of heartbreak, disillusionment, and despair in the ranks of clergy colleagues, frustration among laity, unrest in congregations, but the experience is foreign to me. I have had quite the opposite experience: delight in ministry; the joy of growth; a flourishing community rich in gifts, supportive, positive in spirit—making ministry for me a challenging, fulfilling vocation. Two decades of pastoral experience in the congregation I presently serve have seen the numbers multiply nearly five times over. The giving has grown proportionately, the site and facility expanded, and a large team is now engaged in creative ministry. Now, as I enter my fourth decade of pastoral ministry, I do so with greater zest, confidence, and joy than when ordaining hands set me aside for this task. I had listened and felt the hurt. I knew I had no answer, no formula for success, no quick fix to make the pain go away and turn it all around. Further, I, too, wonder about the future of the institutional forms of the church which, not only at the local level, but even more critically at the level of denominational structures, are experiencing sickness unto death. I felt disinclined to give some triumphalistic testimony of success in ministry. Someone suggested I write a piece explaining what people are fleeing when they come to Christ Community Church. I resist that idea lest it appear that large numbers have joined from other congregations, which really is not the case. Yet, © Grand Valley State University   �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 2   there are many among us who have fled the institutional church at some point; they have simply dropped out, despairing of finding an authentic spirituality and sensing that the church was a source of manipulation and coercion, imposing shame and reinforcing guilt, rather than offering release from it. They found the church to be ever so much like a dysfunctional family. Others have fled the reactionary posture of the church on contemporary issues, the slowness of the church to address matters of human sexuality, feminist concerns, and concerns for justice and peace. Weary of fighting, waging battles about questions on which contemporary society has reached a responsible consensus, some have left the church with bitterness and cynicism. Yet, eventually the hunger for spiritual reality sets them on a quest and many have found a home and kindred seekers in this community. We have welcomed many others who sense they had been cut off, rejected. The human situation is messy. At some point most folks color outside the lines; traditional expectations are shattered. And, too often, precisely at that point, the church is awkward, daring not to reach out and embrace lest it appear to sanction the life beyond the pale. If not in word, perhaps in body language, a person stained with grit picked up along the way senses he or she threatens accepted morality and the proper mode of behavior. I like to speak of Christ Community as “an alternative to church as usual.” Over and over again, witness is borne to the tangible experience of “something different.” To flesh out the ingredients that create the alternative is not an easy task, and I hesitate even to try, lest, defining too specifically, that elusive spirit be lost, becoming one more “formula for success.” What follows renders no formula, and what is proffered comes with the acknowledgment that Christ Community is fragile, flawed, and riddled with weaknesses. It is simply the story of a pastor and a congregation over two decades. The story actually begins in 1960 when I became the pastor of this congregation for the first time after seminary graduation. During those first four years of preaching and pastoral work, the theology with which I entered the ministry was tempered by concrete experience. Mary was a bright, lovely high school girl. She was one of those exceptions to the rule; her parents had nothing to do with the church, but she did—on her own. She was in worship, church school, and youth groups. She had a significant spiritual experience, was baptized, made a good confession. She was radiant and I was her spiritual guardian. For summer work, she left the community to join a friend whose mother was a strong Mormon. When she returned, she was in spiritual turmoil. I cited the Scriptures; she the Book of Mormon; two authorities and an impasse. I lost her and I was shattered. © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 3   In that experience, I came to see that my every claim was banked on the person’s accepting the authority of the Bible as the exclusive source of saving truth. Otherwise, I was stumped. The foundation of my theological system was beginning to crumble. Moving to a conservative congregation in the East, I began to research the nature of biblical authority. At that time, the Reformed Church cooperated in the publication of a new curriculum for church school, and it was introduced by study papers that dealt with the questions of Scripture’s normative function in the church and scriptural interpretation. I became convinced that my own understanding of biblical authority was untenable; if I were to continue to preach, I needed a new basis upon which to do it. Evangelical passion was possible for me only if it could be coupled with intellectual integrity. I needed to find “my gospel” or I knew I would never be able to preach with power and authority, with a note of authenticity. That was the existential quest that led me to pursue graduate study in the Netherlands. Hendrikus Berkhof, then professor of dogmatics at the University of Leiden, agreed to become my mentor in a doctoral program in which my major area was the history of dogma. Hearing my questions and sensing the nature of my quest, his first assignment for me was to read Barth’s Church Dogmatics, Vol. I.1-2, The Doctrine of the Word of God. I was amazed; Barth took the Scriptures seriously, as seriously as I had ever experienced. I thought to myself, one day conservative Christian thinkers will run to Barth for refuge, if ever they discover the dynamic of this great mind and heart. I read with a voracious appetite. Pages 522 and 523 of that volume lie open before me now, dog-eared, as much underlined as not, margins full of my jottings as I struggled to understand Barth. Barth writes, The Reformers’ doctrine of inspiration is an honoring of God, and of the free grace of God. The statement that the Bible is the Word of God is on this view no limitation, but an unfolding of the perception of the sovereignty in which the Word of God condescended to become flesh for us in Jesus Christ, and a human word in the witness of the prophets and apostles as witnesses to His incarnation. (p. 522) As the passion and vitality of the sixteenth-century Reformers’ experience was replaced by the second-hand experience of their spiritual heirs, there was an effort to establish certitude of faith through a high doctrine of inspiration. Barth contends that the statement “the Bible is the Word of God” was transformed from a statement about the free grace of God into a statement about the nature of the Bible “as exposed to human inquiry brought under human control.” Barth goes on to point out that the eventual historical investigation of the Bible in the Enlightenment period was simply a logical consequence of viewing the Bible as under human control rather than as available as the instrument of God’s © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 4   revelation by God’s free grace. He gives a thorough review of the history of the elevation of the doctrine of inspiration. I found myself in Barth’s description: But ever more clearly and definitely a certainty was sought and found quite different from the spiritual certainty which could satisfactorily have been reached on these lines, and which on these lines would have been recognized as the only certainty but also as real certainty. What was wanted was a tangible certainty and not a divine, a certainty of work and not solely of faith. In token of this change there arose the doctrine of inspiration of the high orthodoxy of the 17th century. (Ibid., p. 524) And the consequences? Should there be found even the minutest error in the Bible, then it is no longer wholly the Word of God, and the inviolability of its authority is destroyed. (Ibid.) Barth rejected the attempts of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to make the Scriptures the object of historical investigation as one might investigate any literary piece, and he rejected, as well, the attack on the seventeenth-century’s supernaturalism. He insisted, We must attack it rather because its supernaturalism is not radical enough. The intention behind it [seventeenth-century supernaturalism] was ultimately only a single and in its own way very “naturalistic” postulate that the bible must offer us a divina et infallibilis historia; that it must not contain human error in any of its verses; that in all its parts and the totality of its words and letters as they are before us it must express divine truth in a form in which it can be established and understood; that under the human words it must speak to us the Word of God in such a way that we can at once hear and read it as such with the same obviousness and directness with which we can hear and read other human words.... The Bible was now grounded upon itself apart from the mystery of Christ and the Holy Ghost. It became a “paper Pope,” and unlike the living Pope in Rome it was wholly given up into the hands of its interpreters. It was no longer a free and spiritual force, but an instrument of human power. And in this form the Bible became so like the holy book of other religions, for which something similar had always been claimed, that the superiority of its claim could not be asserted in relation to them or to the many achievements of the human spirit generally.... The intention of establishing the authority of the Bible along these lines was to avoid historical relativism, but it opened up the way to it, and theology and Church did not hesitate for a moment to tread that way. In content the 17th century doctrine of inspiration asserted things which cannot be maintained in face of a serious reading and exposition of what the Bible itself says about itself, and in face of an honest appreciation of the facts of © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 5   its origin and tradition. Therefore the postulate on which 17th century man staked everything proved incapable of fulfillment (Ibid., pp. 525-26) I was reading my own spiritual biography; the existential pastoral experience that had exposed the vulnerability of my own theological position and triggered the serious search for a new basis for preaching and pastoral care led me to the discovery that I had fallen into the very pitfall against which Barth warned. I struggled. Berkhof watched me dangle. I wanted him to give me answers, to solve the mystery of biblical authority. He only smiled and let me keep working. He did tell me he, too, had walked the path I was on, but I would have to find my own way. He was not forthcoming with answers but was most helpful in aiding me to clarify the questions. I remember suggesting I should write my dissertation on this matter. I was convinced there would be little theological progress on any front if in the RCA we were not freed from a doctrine of inspiration that, for all the protestations, looked suspiciously like the seventeenth-century version Barth attributed to the orthodox who lost the vitality of faith by lusting for certainty they could control. He responded simply, “Do you realize what they will do to you?” My dissertation subject did not develop in the area of biblical authority, but I did come to an understanding that enabled me to remain under the authority of Scripture as Word of God while recognizing as well the human nature of that witness and the continuing work of God’s Spirit making the witness the Word of God here and now. Just as I was forging a new foundation for preaching and pastoral care, I experienced a personal crisis, a painful divorce and breakup of my family. It seemed my future ministry was in jeopardy just when I felt more strongly than ever the desire to engage in the ministry of the Word. Then the congregation I first served, which is the Spring Lake, Michigan, congregation I still serve, invited me to return, an act of grace and, for me, the greatest confirmation of my call to ministry I have ever experienced. Grace became a tangible human experience. Grace was incarnate in this people. They touched me and I knew the touch of God. They took me in, supported me in the care of my three small children, believed in me, and through them, I was healed. That took courage, for in 1971 that was a radical thing to do. That is where it all started, I believe, for my experience became a paradigm for the ministry of grace in this congregation. Two decades of exhilarating pastoral ministry have issued from a mediation of grace from people to pastor. The conjunction of intensive theological reflection and concrete human experience created the occasion for a congregation to become an alternative to church as usual. That combination continues to be fruitful as we strive to live into our name, Christ Community, a name we chose in © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 6   1971 to express a new vision and to create a new image. Newness did not come without cost, without a willingness to let go of congregational patterns which had grown and developed over 101 years of life in the Spring Lake community. The name change signaled a willingness to die to what had been, trusting the God of resurrection to create something new. A theological vision, hammered out of the dialogue with Scripture and concrete human experience, is at the center of our life. For me, human experience has driven me to theological reflection, and theological investigation has freed me to proclaim good news with evangelical passion and intellectual integrity. The vision that shapes us could not have evolved had I not come to a new understanding of Scripture, as indicated above. I believe Scripture is normative, God’s Spirit moving the human author to witness to the “happening” of God’s revelation. Scripture arises out of the history of Israel and Jesus, the locus God in freedom chose to unveil God’s eternal purpose for Creation, the “place” in which God’s grace has come to clear demonstration. But, the story goes on. Just as the biblical witness is the interpretation and reinterpretation in light of ongoing historical experience of living under the reign of God, so the church keeps alive the story of Israel and Jesus Christ, but must constantly re-frame the given story, casting it in new perspective, as it moves through history’s unfolding landscape. Any expression of Christian faith must be shaped through dialogue with that witness. The Bible is the inspired preaching of the community of faith, but preaching in the power of the Spirit is today, as well, Word of God. God’s revelation in Israel and Jesus is listened to in the context of concrete human experience. Revelation “happens” as Barth insisted, and it still happens. Traditionally, the Scriptures have been used in an authoritarian manner, laying the “then” over “now” in a prescriptive way. One preaches “correct beliefs” and is locked into specific practices of life and worship. We are seeking rather to experience God in concrete human experience illumined by Scripture so that our faith and our life connect. In preaching and teaching I have cultivated openness, affirmed diversity, and encouraged respect for a broad spectrum of opinion. A closed belief system disallows the possibility of a full human experience, which is always developing, to remain connected to one’s authentic spiritual perceptions—which cannot help but receive the impact of present experience. If an external rule holds absolute authority, then I cannot honestly evaluate my own concrete human experience. I have the answer before I can formulate the question. Where such biblicism is the rule, the gulf between “correct belief” and actual experience widens. Subscription to a doctrinal system that is absolutized forces compartmentalization of religious belief from everyday experience of the world and life. © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 7   If there is a center to the theological understanding that shapes our total existence as a people, it is the theology of grace. Out of the barrenness of Sarah’s womb (Gen. 11:30) God began a movement with particular focus in order to realize the universal purpose expressed in creation. A theology of creation embraces the covenant of grace initiated with Abraham, through whom God would bring grace to all nations. God’s electing love found expression in the covenant community, not to the exclusion of the many, but on behalf of the many. If I would point to one theological insight that has transformed my preaching and released me to embrace all who come and, consequently, has formed the mind and heart of this community, it is the universal extent of God’s grace. I will not argue universalism; I think when we come to “isms” we generally know too much; we become ideological. But that God’s grace is of far greater extent than it has been traditionally understood is a deep conviction and it has changed my ministry. The limits of grace can be debated. Christians differ. But that to which I witness regarding my own experience of ministry and the tone quality of the congregation cannot be denied. It is rooted in a theology of grace that takes historical shape in Israel and the church and embraces creation. A profound sense of God’s grace brings one a very great freedom, freedom from fear and defensiveness, freedom from the anxiety of what the future holds for human development, scientific discovery, or philosophical formulation. Grace brings freedom and creates openness. There are no questions we dare not ask, no perspectives we fear to bring to expression. The people have joined me in a pilgrimage of faith. There is no “Christ Community line.” They trust me and give me freedom to probe and test, and I give them freedom to agree or disagree. I have continued to do serious theological study and I offer classes in theology. For example, we have studied Berkhof’s Christian Faith, Küng’s On Being a Christian, Does God Exist?, and A Theology for the Third Millenium, along with David Tracy, Charles Davis, Edward Schillebeeckx, and many others. I always let the congregation know where I am investigating, what questions are pressing to me, and in which direction I am moving. We do theology together—indirectly. Out of concrete human experience, the stuff of our present experience of life in family, community, and world, we think theologically. The biblical story illumines experience, and experience elicits new light from the Scriptures. Our theology is not a static given; it is in process, an ongoing adventure of seeing our life in God’s light, a joyful and serious endeavor of discovering what it means to live before the face of God. By seeking to define and clarify the questions that move our human existence, rather than claiming to have answers, we give space for a broad spectrum of © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 8   persons to join the journey. The openness of the community creates freedom to be open to any contemporary quest for meaning, for transcendence. Those who are empty and rootless are not impressed if handed a ready-made answer before their question is sensitively heard. The recent widespread interest in the work in mythology by Joseph Campbell, popularized by the interview with Bill Moyers and published under the title The Power of Myth, is just one example of the spiritual quest of multitudes who have given up on the institutional church as a place where their quest might be satisfied. What responsibility do we bear for their despair of finding in the church some clue to spiritual reality, to the experience of God? Secure in the grace of God, our faith is not fragile. When I encounter the defensiveness and fear so common in our churches today, I am amazed at the lack of confidence in the truth of biblical faith as though it need be protected from the challenge of new insights and angles of vision. God’s grace—before it, I am in awe, humbled, full of gratitude. I rest in it and feel a freedom to let God be God, to entrust my flawed self and fallible understanding to God s mercy. I don’t know why some experience anguish in ministry and I have known such joy. I know all is Grace; therefore boasting is excluded, but so is despair. There is enough pain in the church to go around, and simplistic solutions and pious clichés only deepen the woundedness. Our story is simply a story of trust, resting in the good and gracious God, letting go of yesterday’s formulations if they no longer connect with today’s experience; letting go of church structures that have outlived the purpose for which they were created. Maybe the truth is that the institutional church has to die. Maybe our pain stems from our desperate attempts to rescue structures which are warring against the larger purposes of the Sovereign One. Maybe our techniques and promotional schemes, our growth strategies and evangelism campaigns are human control measures borrowed from the marketing strategy of a consumer society. We may have to let the church die, but God is not dead. Reference: Karl Barth. Church Dogmatics, Vol. I.1-2, The Doctrine of the Word of God. First published 1957; T & T Clark Ltd., 1961. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, Vol I, 1961. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19910902 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991-09-02 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource An Alternative to Church as Usual Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on September 2, 1991 entitled "An Alternative to Church as Usual", it appeared in Perspectives, September 1991, pp. 18-21. Tags: Authority of Scripture, Faith Community, Church, Universal Grace, Inclusive, Spiritual Journey. Scripture references: Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, Vol I, 1961.. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Authority of Scripture Church Faith Community Inclusive Spiritual Journey Universal Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f93333c2cb59ee99c6c3c4503e8a5b80.pdf a5e44a26412ab4fb49e7eb3111954861 PDF Text Text   Finally Comes the Poet By Walter Brueggemann (Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1989) Review by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Publication of Review Unknown Brueggemann has done it again; here is a book about preaching that makes one want to find a pulpit and preach. The Old Testament scholar, who in his many works so effectively breaks open the text, making it appear to be something out of today’s newspaper, addresses specifically the task of preaching. But this is not a typical book about preaching; it is an eloquent plea for creative, imaginative, daring preaching; not prosaic, moralistic, angry preaching, but poetic preaching that paints images of another alternative possibility for human life and human community. The manuscript was prepared and presented as the 1989 Lyman Beecher Lectures at Yale Divinity School. Brueggemann not only portrays vividly the preacher as poet, but presents models of interpretation of Old Testament texts that address the contemporary horizon of human experience into which the preacher is called to address the Word of God. In the Preface, Brueggemann writes: I have sought to address the crisis of interpretation the preacher faces in our culture, what has either dismissed or controlled the text. Preaching as an act of interpretation is in our time demanding, daring, and dangerous. (p. ix) Perhaps more poignantly than any biblical scholar writing today, Brueggemann brings into collision, in the being of the preacher, the text and the contemporary cultural situation. He contends, It is increasingly clear that what the text “means” for us is not simply a matter of exegesis, but concerns the larger ideological realities in our society that rob us of our capacity to speak, our capacity to care, and our capacity to notice. Preaching and interpretation, however, exist precisely for such situations. It is the task of preaching to provide a ground and energy for speech, care, and notice. (Ibid.) Brueggemann points to the present cultural situation as a “prose-flattened” world in which the gospel is readily heard and taken for granted as though it contained no © Grand Valley State University   �Brueggemann, Finally Comes the Poet, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 2   unsettling news and no unwelcome threat; it has been “flattened, trivialized, and rendered inane.” His proposal is the practice of “another way of communication that makes another shaping of life possible.” The task demands a poet. Brueggemann reacts against our prose world “that is organized in settled formulae, so that even pastoral prayers and love letters sound like memos.” Rather, he calls for the poet whose language “moves like Bob Gibson’s fast ball, that jumps at the right moment.” The poet/prophet is a voice that shatters settled reality and evokes new possibility in the listening assembly. (p. 4) There are four partners who need to be present in the “speech meeting” so that “the new reality can be birthed,” the text, the baptized, the specific occasion for speech, and this better world given as fresh revelation. The meeting involves this old text, the spent congregation believing but impoverished, the artist of new possibility, the disclosure ... The newly claimed territory becomes a new home of freedom, justice, peace, and abiding joy. This happens when the poet comes, when the poet speaks, when the preacher comes as poet. (p. 11) In four chapters Brueggemann addresses the biblical word to the present cultural situation: Numbness and Ache (The Strangeness of Healing), Alienation and Rage (The Odd Invitation to Doxological Communion), Restlessness and Greed (Obedience and Missional Imagination), and Resistance and Relinquishment (A Permit for Freedom). In each chapter rich veins of biblical material are mined and interpreted so that the text powerfully addresses the situation of the baptized community of today. Woven throughout the fresh unwrapping of the biblical text is significant comment on the preacher’s task. The event of preaching is an event in transformed imagination. Poets, in the moment of preaching, are permitted to perceive and voice the world differently, to dare a new phrase, a new picture, a fresh juxtaposition of matters long known. Poets are authorized to invite a new conversation, with new voices sounded, new hearings possible. The new conversation may end in freedom to trust and courage to relinquish. The new conversation, on which our very lives depend, requires a poet and not a moralist. Because finally church people are like other people; we are not changed by new rules. The deep places in our lives - places of resistance and embrace - are not ultimately reached by instruction. Those places of resistance and embrace are reached only by stories, by images, metaphors, and phrases that live out the world differently, apart from our fear and hurt. The reflection that comes from the poet requires playfulness, imagination, and interpretation. The new conversation allows for ambiguity, probe, and daring hunch. It is only free people, in contexts of trust, who are able to walk close to the scandal, to be seen in its presence, to live by its gifts. (p. 109f) © Grand Valley State University �Brueggemann, Finally Comes the Poet, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 3   Brueggemann insists that the preacher does not simply report the old conversation between God and Israel “as though submitting an old verbatim.” Rather, a conversation “now to be imagined, evoked, and shaped in this moment of speaking and hearing” is offered. For all who are called to preach and teach the word of God, Brueggemann offers a rare combination of rich biblical interpretation, sensitivity to contemporary culture and contagious awe before the preaching event.   © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Walter Brueggemann, Finally Comes the Poet, 1989. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19910501 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991-05-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Finally Comes the Poet Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on May 1, 1991 entitled "Finally Comes the Poet", on the book Finally Comes the Poet, written by Walter Brueggemann, it appeared in Perspectives, May 1991, p. 20f. Tags: Preaching, Scripture, Meaning, Faith Journey, Tradition. Scripture references: Walter Brueggemann, Finally Comes the Poet, 1989.. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Faith Journey Meaning Preaching Scripture Tradition https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/afd3b40b4aecfe3e3eb959246fc447f7.pdf 4bdbfa03d5b19d3667f982afeaad4e64 PDF Text Text Sleeping Through a Revolution Article by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought April 1991, pp. 8-14 Reformed theology in America, the roots of which lie in the Netherlands, has managed to sleep through the revolution of the modern world and survive. Through strong ethnic identity, internal growth, and a militant mind that maintained an adversarial attitude over against modern culture, a Reformed community of Dutch origin still exists. But the defensive posture that has largely characterized it has prevented it from translating the richness of its sixteenthcentury legacy of Reformation theology into a proclamation of the gospel to engage modern thought. I was struck by this fact as I read Hendrikus Berkhof’s Two Hundred Years of Theology. Berkhof wrote this work after retiring from the dogmatics chair at the University of Leiden. He calls it a personal journey because he wrote to satisfy his own curiosity about the philosophical and theological developments since the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century. The engagement of the gospel and modern thought has been the passion of Berkhof’s own endeavor as a Christian thinker. He traces the efforts of those theologians who sought to build a bridge between the gospel and modern culture, a culture dominated by the assumptions of the Enlightenment: the autonomy of the human person, human rationality as the measure of truth, the historical conditionedness of all truth, and the epistemological dualism of subject-object, of knowledge and faith. Berkhof’s conclusions at the end of his survey are sober. Was the effort successful? He answers in the negative: “Secularized culture manifested polite indifference if not outright intolerance.” Nevertheless, the struggle was necessary and its consequences significant. What struck me as I followed the story of the past two hundred years – the world of modern culture in the wake of the Enlightenment – was that the community of which I am a part was not even engaged in the struggle. As I reflected on my own theological education, I realized I was thoroughly schooled in theological development through the Reformation, but understood very little of the revolution in cultural understanding effected by the Enlightenment, especially © Grand Valley State University   �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 2   the understanding of the human process of knowing and the rise of historical thinking. In an attempt to understand why there has been so little engagement with the thought and cultural assumptions of the modern world in my own tradition, I turned to the study of paradigm shifts in the history of dogma, a study spearheaded by Hans Küng. Küng traced theological development with major epochal shifts over two thousand years. He, along with David Tracy, gathered an international Ecumenical Symposium at Tubingen in 1983 to discuss “A New Paradigm of Theology.” Papers delivered at the symposium are published in the volume Paradigm Change in Theology. At the symposium, Küng charted the epochal shifts in theology to test his scheme of periodization. Beginning with the primitive Christian apocalyptic paradigm, the historical progression moves through the ancient church Hellenistic, the medieval Roman Catholic, the Reformation Protestant with its two consequent paradigms of counterreformation – Roman Catholic and Protestant Orthodox paradigms – the modern Enlightenment paradigm, and on to the present contemporary ecumenical paradigm. Küng came on the idea of paradigm shifts in Thomas S. Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, in which Kuhn portrayed scientific development as occurring, not as had been commonly assumed, in smooth cumulative progress, but rather in leaps triggered by paradigm shifts, the displacement of one model of understanding by another. Küng applied Kuhn’s discovery to theological development and found points of significant shift there as well. Paradigm as Kuhn defined it and as Küng utilizes it means “an entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by the members of a given community.” Küng’s periodization marks off those points in the movement of history where a major shift in understanding took place, a shift from one constellation of beliefs to another – a change in the explanation model through which Christian faith was interpreted. The points of shift can be debated and the flow of history cannot be rigidly sectioned off. Nevertheless, the periodization Küng has suggested has been widely received. Küng developed his study of paradigm shifts further in Theology for the Third Millennium. There he pointed out the interesting difference between paradigm shifts in the natural sciences and in theology. In science, as data pile up that cannot be explained within the existing paradigm, pressure builds to find a new paradigm. When the new paradigm becomes available, one that succeeds in explaining a broader range of data, it replaces the old paradigm, which becomes obsolete. But this is not the case with paradigm shifts in theology. The same process operates: new understanding of the knowing process and of the nature of human knowledge, new data – for example, data acquired through the rise of the historical-critical method of biblical study, new philosophical insights, scientific © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 3   knowledge – eventuate in a major shift in understanding of the Christian tradition. A new paradigm comes into being. But in contrast to the process in the natural sciences, the old paradigm does not become obsolete; it continues to be the paradigm within which certain Christian communities understand Christian faith and existence. Thus, the two thousand years of theological development traced by Küng, reveal eight major paradigms. But the fascinating fact is that all eight paradigms continue to claim the loyalty of significant communities. All eight continue to exert their influence down to the present. This insight enabled me to discover how Reformed theology, with roots in the Netherlands, has been able to remain largely unscathed by the world of modern thought. It has continued to live within the paradigm of Reformed orthodoxy that took shape in the Reformed scholasticism of the seventeenth century, insulated from the acids of modernity. A form of the gospel thus has been preserved, but at a great price. The failure to engage the modern world under the cultural assumptions of the Enlightenment has led to a kind of ghetto existence and a failure to bring the rich legacy of Reformation theology to new expression. An historically conditioned theological confessional position has been frozen in time, absolutized, and perpetuated largely intact over generations, largely untouched by ongoing cultural, philosophical, and scientific assumptions. Theologically we are stuck, and the best and the brightest know it. Reformed orthodoxy has slept through the revolution of human understanding and knowledge created by the Enlightenment, never to this day having come to terms with the autonomy of the human person, the throwing off of all forms of authoritarianism, and the rise of historical thinking. These cultural assumptions are now being challenged. Many observers believe we are living at an epochal hinge point in history, experiencing the emergence of the postmodern age. But we will not be able to move directly from a seventeenth-century paradigm to the postmodern world without going through the baptism of the Enlightenment. While its assumptions are losing their self-evident status, what will not be lost is the value of critical rationality, and what will not be tolerated is any return to authoritarian claims, be they of church, of tradition, or of Bible. In theology old paradigms keep their adherents even when theological development has left them behind. But they can do so only by some form of authoritarian claim. In the case of Reformed orthodoxy the authoritarian claim of the Bible has held theological movement hostage, hindering meaningful dialogue with the sciences and philosophy. We are theologically stuck, and we will not become unstuck until we learn to value Scripture as authority, but break loose from its authoritarian use. In order to give that contention foundation, I will review in brief the philosophical and theological movement of the past two and a half centuries, indicating how philosophical, especially epistemological, analysis has impacted © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 4   theological formulation in the broader Christian tradition. Under the domination of Enlightenment assumptions, that development has reached an impasse. I will then discuss new possibilities for theological breakthrough opened by the emerging postmodern paradigm. Finally, with reference to one of the great Dutch Reformed theologians, Herman Bavinck, I will suggest what is necessary if our tradition is to come to new and fruitful expression. The Copernican-Galilean controversy out of which modern culture arose was a severe challenge to the medieval synthesis of theology and Aristotelian science achieved by Thomas Aquinas. A challenge to the Aristotelian cosmology and natural philosophy was a challenge to theological orthodoxy, both to Catholic and to Reformation orthodoxy. In that opening battle between the church and natural science, science won its independence from the intellectual and theological authority of the church. The early representatives of philosophical and scientific endeavor lived in two houses: the house of human rationality in which they plied their scientific skills, and the house of faith, in which they remained faithful to the church and its theological authority, understood as based beyond human reason in revelation. This was true of Descartes, considered the father of modern philosophy. He remained in the church, but understood his critical thinking as belonging to the natural realm – a purely human activity. It was Descartes who set the thinking subject over against the object to be thought, the world of material reality. He argued for the certainty of knowledge that could be arrived at by the mind observing the universe, which was understood as a vast machine. This subjectobject split became determinative for modern thought in science, philosophy, and theology. The mechanistic character of the natural world became the premise on which Newton described the natural laws by which the universe operated. The solid success of the natural sciences, in their effort to understand and control nature, seemed to verify Descartes’ model of human knowing and Newton’s model of the physical universe. The Enlightenment of the eighteenth century cannot be explained or understood without reference to Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and his critical analysis of how human knowledge is attained. His Critique of Pure Reason (1781) is broadly acknowledged as the foundational work of German philosophy. In his Two Hundred Years of Theology, Hendrikus Berkhof contends that this work of Kant’s must be valued “as a radical new beginning for evangelical theology,” and that in the wake of its appearance, orthodox scholasticism, rationalism, and supernaturalism found that, at a single stroke, the road forward had been blocked. In addition, the appearance of Kant’s Critique meant... the birth of the new theology, or rather: The modern way of posing questions, and modern methodology, in theology. (pp. 1 ff) © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Although Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason destroyed the traditional proofs for the existence of God, thereby striking terror in the hearts of conservative theologians, it is Berkhof’s conviction that Kant’s purpose was positive in intent. Kant himself wrote, “I therefore had to abolish knowledge in order to make room for belief.” For Kant, faith and knowledge were separate but complementary and both were necessary. Here again we see the split of faith and reason which Aquinas synthesized when the overwhelming influence of Aristotelian thought in the West forced an accommodation with revelation in the thirteenth century. It is the same split mentioned above in regard to Descartes and Newton. In Kant, however, we have an acute analysis of the human knowing process brought about by the growing autonomy of human reason, which was throwing off all authoritarian structures, whether ecclesiastical (the church) or revelational (the Bible). Kant was a child of the Enlightenment. Preeminent philosopher though he was, he nevertheless maintained an intense theological and religious interest. Berkhof believes that it was “Kant’s purpose to save religion as well as the Enlightenment: in this double objective... lay his deepest passion as a thinker” (p. 5). Dividing the realm of knowledge into two fundamentally separate domains, he posited the world of phenomena and the world of the noumena. The former was accessible to unaided human reason. The empirical knowledge gained by the knowing subject was not a direct mirror of the natural world but the product of the interaction of the knowing mind and the data of the senses. For the noumenal world, the things in themselves – for example, the universe as a causal whole, the human self as free agent, and God – no empirical verification was possible. Yet, for practical reasons, Kant argued, faith in them was absolutely necessary. This assertion was made in Kant’s second work, The Critique of Practical Reason. This fundamental dualism has shaped and determined modern culture; it is the inheritance of the Enlightenment, whose center is the autonomous human person. This dualism has been regarded as axiomatic – the climate of opinion that has dominated the modern period. It is on this background that the whole enterprise of modern theology must be understood, at least the theology that attempted to bridge the gulf between the gospel and modern culture, the theology of classic nineteenth-century liberalism, to use Küng’s schematization of epochal paradigms. This is evident in the theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher, regarded as the father of modern theology. If Kant successfully blocked the road to the knowledge of God through rational inquiry, through metaphysical speculation, then what road remains open and on what basis can knowledge of God be grounded? Appeal to authority (of church, tradition, or Bible) was no longer compelling. Where, then, could one turn except to the interior life of the individual – to “the feeling of absolute dependence,” an experience that Schleiermacher maintained was common to all humankind at some time or other. This was not to claim, as did © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 6   Feuerbach and others later in the whole development of modern atheism, that religion, or specifically Christianity, arose from the feeling of dependence of the human person. No. Rather, the feeling of absolute dependence was the human precondition for it. Schleiermacher was pointing to the place into which revelation enters. The ongoing development of modern theology was filtered through Kant philosophically and Schleiermacher theologically, whether a theologian followed them or rejected them. They determined the shape of the playing field and the rules of the game. We can see this in the theology of Albrecht Ritschl, whose influence came to flower in the 1870s. Ritschl was the first German theologian to recognize the intellectual shift from idealism to realism under the impact of such thinkers as Feuerbach, Comte, Marx, and Engels; the significant achievements of science, technology, and industry; the alienation of the working class; and the impact of Darwin’s Origin of the Species (1863). The cultural mood in Germany turned more and more to the world of experience and to the natural laws governing it. Ritschl concluded in such a cultural milieu that the knowledge of God could be realized only in the act of faith – faith directed toward the saving activity of Christ. Religious knowledge, he claimed, consists in value judgments, a term for which he is best known and most misunderstood. Berkhof explains: He intends to maintain the uniqueness of the Christian faith as a way of access to the “conception of God” through trust in Jesus Christ – apart from any ground other than that given in the unity of revelation and faith. (p. 121) Wilhelm Herrmann developed the intention of Ritschl’s theology. He was convinced, as was Ritschl, that the highest of religion and morality was united in the figure of Jesus. Again following Ritschl under the impact of Kant’s epistemology, faith and knowledge were held distinct. The authority of Scripture, dogma, or creed had to do with knowledge, not faith. He wrote, They cannot bring about a saving personal encounter; they appeal to our thinking only as law. Religion is a totally independent world, though closely bound up with morality, because it relates us to divine revelation and must be the answer to the misery of our moral condition. Herrmann was deeply concerned about the philosophical base of his theology. For him, Kant loomed large, “whose mighty thoughts emerge increasingly in almost all domains of human learning as the select governor of all true research.” He valued Kant’s analysis of the knowing process positively “because in every connection he has placed the value of faith, its independence from science, in the clearest light.” In his analysis of Herrmann’s theology, Berkhof offers an © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 7   illuminating image by which to understand Herrmann over against the rising tide of historical consciousness and historical thinking. When I read Herrmann what emerges in my mind is the image of a rock in the midst of a rising flood. In Ritschl the rock of moral autonomy still had a broad surface. Now, however, with the waves of the flood rising higher and higher, it became much narrower. The parts that are closer to the sea – like corporeality, psychological deveopment, history, social relationships, and the authority of Scripture and Christian tradition – have already been inundated. Herrmann now withdrew to the narrow center, to individual (though conceived as interpersonal) inwardness where the individual is in communion with God through “the inner life of Jesus.” With a splendid sort of consistency, he devoted his intellectual powers to the defense of the peak of this rock. (Two Hundred Years of Theology, p. 146) The rise of the historical-critical method of biblical research led Herrmann to realize that the certainty of faith could not rest on the probable results of historical criticism. Faith does take shape in history, but its basis is above history and beyond the reach of historical research. Is it possible to posit a basis for faith above history invulnerable to the acids of historical criticism? Ernst Troeltsch, a student of Ritschl, did not think so. He rejected the possibility of grounding faith in inner experience, thereby finding an absolute ground in history. Troeltsch, too, recognized that the deterministichistorical mode of thinking was inundating the gospel, but he did not believe, contrary to Herrmann, that there was yet a ridge of the rock above the flood. Troeltsch saw no alternative but to plunge into the stream of historicism with its relativity. Jesus could not be lifted out of the stream of history. Every historical person and phenomenon is subject to historical conditionedness. In Berkhof’s words, history is an ever-moving stream in which the movement of each drop is determined by the mass of water that precedes it, and each drop shares in determining the direction of what follows. That is the fundamental view of “historicism,” another term for determinism applied to historical reality. (p. 150) Historical thinking, which arose in the eighteenth century, is another hallmark of modern thought. It has marked all subsequent modern thought as indelibly as has Kant’s analysis of the knowing process. In Troeltsch the full consequences of historical thinking were drawn; Herrmann’s “inner life of Jesus” was “time conditioned,” thoroughly enmeshed in the stream of history. The struggle to find a basis for faith continued into the twentieth century. The catalyst for a major reversal of the tide of continental theology was Karl Barth. The first edition of Barth’s Romerbrief sent shock waves through the world of © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 8   academic theology and philosophy. Associated with Barth’s name in the early period was Rudolf Bultmann, who affirmed Barth’s move, seeing in it a shift to an existentialist interpretation of the gospel – a direction soon rejected by Barth. For Bultmann, Barth’s early probings seemed consistent with the effort of their common teacher, Wilhelm Herrmann, to find a basis for faith beyond the relativities of history. For Herrmann and even more radically for Bultmann, there was a basic distrust in historically ascertainable facts as vehicles of revelation. Revelation for Bultmann occurs above history in the “existing” individual who, in the encounter with the claim of the gospel, is called to decision, the decision of faith or unbelief apart from recourse to the investigation of any ground for faith in historical data. Bultmann’s whole program of demythologizing the gospel was an attempt to peel off the husk of historical happening, for which only relative certainty could be gained, and find the kernel of God’s appeal in the Christ event. That Jesus was is all that can be claimed as certain. The “Das” of Jesus is the point at which God’s claim touches historical reality. Barth’s first edition of Romerbrief was a seismic shock, but for Barth it was only an initial probe – he was in transition. The second edition showed Barth not so interested, as was Bultmann, in the existential analysis of the human person addressed by the gospel, but in the God Who addresses the human person. In the preface to the second edition of Romans, he writes: If I have a system, it is limited to a recognition of what Kierkegaard called the “infinite qualitative distinction” between time and eternity, and to my regarding this as possessing negative as well as positive significance: “God is in heaven, and thou art on earth.” The relation between such a God and such a man, and the relation between such a man and such a God is for me the theme of the Bible and the essence of philosophy. Philosophers name this Krisis of human perception the Prime Cause: The Bible beholds at the same cross-roads the figure of Jesus Christ. The second edition of Romans marked Barth’s turn to the interpretation of the Bible, a turn precipitated by his disillusionment with involvement with the social democracy movement, which failed to mobilize resistance to World War I, and the “crisis” created by the need to preach weekly. In his wrestling with Paul’s letter to the Romans, Barth was overwhelmed with the sense of the absolute priority of God revealed in the event of Jesus Christ and the working of Spirit. Barth was on the way, on a new way, and for a time continued to grope and feel his way. For him – as for Bultmann - the thin ridge of the rock on which their teacher Herrmann had grounded faith was flooded. There was no place to stand. God’s revelation in Jesus Christ, effected in the individual by the miracle of the Spirit’s illumination, came “vertically from above.” In the world, in the domain of history, there were no vestiges of perceptibility except, for example, the crater which indicates that a meteor has slammed into the earth. © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page 9   It is clear that even the paradigm shift to the contemporary period demonstrates continuity with the nineteenth century. Barth and Bultmann both radicalized the efforts of Ritschl and Herrmann to ground faith beyond history in order to place faith beyond the attack of historical criticism and the widespread Enlightenment assumption that historical reality can yield only relative certainty. It is further clear that the crucial question that has dogged theological reflection over the past two hundred years is the question forced by the rise of historical consciousness, the question of how absolute truth can be discovered in history’s ongoing movement, how faith can find a certain resting place in the ambiguity of history. The later Barth, the Barth of Church Dogmatics, turned more and more to history, valuing it as the “place” of revelation, in contrast to his early work. However, to the end he never answered what has been perhaps the most serious criticism of his theology, a criticism expressed sharply by his young friend and admirer, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who spoke of Barth’s “positivism of revelation,” a “take it or leave it” approach that denied the legitimacy of questioning the grounds of the revelation, of the claims of the gospel’s appeal. In the final analysis, neither Barth nor Bultmann were able to ground the Word in history, within this worldly existence. The attempt to do so is the story of the post-Bultmannians and the postBarthians – students of these giants who felt the pressure of the cultural mood to find within human historical existence the experience that afforded a place for revelation accessible to empirical verification. The development of Christology “from below,” such as one finds in the early writings of Pannenberg and in Küng, are examples of this swing back to the attempt to give historical foundation to the gospel’s claim. In the Netherlands the work of Kuitert, Berkhouwer’s successor, is an attempt to find in history “the footprints of God.” The pendulum swings back and forth. Berkhof concludes that if one starts, as Barth did, with God, it seems impossible to reach real people, and to start “from below” as Kuitert and others have done makes it questionable whether one reaches God. It seems clear that the assumptions of the Enlightenment – the autonomy of the human person, the subject-object split in the process of human knowing, the historical consciousness – have created false alternatives (an approach from below or an approach from above) thereby bringing theological work to an impasse. If Enlightenment assumptions have led to an impasse, are there indications that by moving out from under the dominance of those assumptions, breakthroughs might be possible in a new cultural period? In a volume of essays entitled Postmodern Theology, James B. Miller contends just that. Miller sets forth the variety of forms in which Descartes’ subject-object dualism and Kant’s knowledge-faith dualism have been manifested in modern thought. From a different angle, he points to the impasse noted above: © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page10   The logical positivist movement implicitly accepted this dualism, but denied meaningfulness to the nonempirical, nonscientific side (i.e., the domain of the noumenal.) Reductionists sought to explain religions and religious phenomena in exclusively scientific (or social scientific) terms, thus denying the autonomy (or independent reality) of the religions (i.e., explaining the noumenal in terms of the phenomenal.) In contrast, the existentialist movement, while implicitly accepting the dualism, invested all significant meaning on the side of faith, moral action, and the religious life (i.e., in the noumenal domain. (p. 5) In Miller’s last group, the existentialists, we can see the line of development we have been tracing from Ritschl through Herrmann to Barth, Bultmann, and their successors. Indeed, we can see it already in “the father of modern theology,” Schleiermacher, who sought the ground for theology in the interior life of the individual. Miller himself sets in contrast the two poles represented by Barth with his “positivism of revelation” – the uncritical confidence that the revelatory “word” provides absolute knowledge of God and God’s purpose for the world, and the logical positivists who held that reason and empirical observation were the sole and sufficient sources of absolute knowledge of the world. Thus, Miller observes, the modern worldview or, as it has been named here, the domination of the cultural assumptions of the Enlightenment, continues to form the dominant perspective in Western and Christian culture. He writes: It is found in the popular understanding of science as an impersonal, detached, and objective search for the facts of nature. Its neoorthodox theological manifestation is “normal” Christian theology. The prophetic rhetoric of the theology justifies a program of cultural change through social action. Its existentialist roots encourage contemporary forms of pastoral care and spiritual renewal which turn people away from their intrinsic relation to nature and history and focus them on a kind of atemporal personhood. It offers a revealed (and so, absolute) dogmatics of transcendence for those who would claim for Christianity a right to cultural dominance. (pp. 7f.) Miller sees such dominance slipping away; he senses that we are entering a postmodern world. Developments in biology and physics are pointing the way to a fundamentally new worldview. If the Enlightenment paradigm characterized reality as mechanical and dualistic, the model for the postmodern world, according to Miller, is historical, relational, and personal. He describes what this means for the emerging understanding of the world and how the understanding of the human process of knowing is changing. The world is not simply here; it is evolving. In contemporary biology the world does not embody an eternal essence, but is rather on ongoing process of creating, humans being both the product of and participants in this ongoing process. © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page11   The world is understood “to be relative, indeterminate, and participatory.” Existence is fully relative, meaning nothing exists in and of itself; “To be is to be related,” in contrast to the absolutes of Newton’s time-space categories. Quantum theory in physics has overthrown the “substantial universe;” the world does not have a history, but is history. Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty points to the indeterminacy of the core of reality and this, in turn, points to the core of reality as an unfathomable mystery. Interestingly, there is more awe before mystery in contemporary physics than in much theology. We began this inquiry with Descartes and Kant and their epistemological analysis. The understanding of what it means to know is called in question by these developments in biology and physics. Miller contends, From a postmodern perspective, all knowledge is historically implicated. Nothing is known apart from its cultural setting, and that setting is constitutive of what is known. There are no culturally neutral facts. Knowledge is not so much found as made, or better, it does not grow so much as it is grown. (p. 11, italics his) There is a significant difference between this conception of the historical character of all truth and the historicism of the modern period as represented by Troeltsch, for example. Here the human subject is not caught in an impersonal historical determinism, but is a participant in the unfolding history of the whole of reality. Truth relative to any community of knowers makes all knowledge incomplete. Alfred North Whitehead described the world not in terms of substances, but in terms of events, pointing thereby not to a world of static substantiality, but to a world of dynamic temporality. From Whitehead has developed the inquiries of the school of process theology. Miller considers what new theological insights are offered from such a conception of reality. In regard to creation, the idea of the dualistic relationship between God and world is called into question, as well as the objectifying of the world as a thing. The view of God creating provides the possibility of overcoming cosmological dualism and historical determinism. Anthropology looks different from such a perspective as well. The processes producing the human person are not different from those out of which all else in the universe emerges. Humankind becomes in such a view part of but not the center of the cosmic drama. There are also implications here for Christology. Incarnation might be understood to characterize every moment of the history of the universe with Jesus of Nazareth being the one who articulates the incarnational model in his teaching and the one who in his person is said to demonstrate the © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page12   meaning of that model for human living. In this sense, Jesus’ uniqueness as incarnation is historical but not ontological. (p. 19) With these brief references to Miller’s application of a new understanding of human knowing and human knowledge, we can see the potential fruitfulness of theological inquiry that throws off the dominance of the cultural assumptions of the Enlightenment and allows the fresh breakthroughs in biology and physics to overcome the impasse into which modern thought has led us. The shape in which Christian faith has come to expression in every cultural epoch has borne the marks of the cultural assumptions of each successive epoch. This is no less true of the modern period under Enlightenment assumptions than of Reformation theology under the assumptions of the sixteenth century with its heritage of medieval thinking and Renaissance humanism. The challenge before us is to bring the legacy of sixteenth century Reformation theology to new expression, given the openings provided by the emerging postmodern age. In his Two Hundred Years of Theology, Berkhof provides a chapter on the engagement with modern thought in the Netherlands. What he has to say about Herman Bavinck is especially interesting in regard to this discussion. Bavinck was firmly rooted in the Reformed Church of the Secession led by Abraham Kuyper. Brilliant and highly gifted, he studied at Leiden under Scholten, against the prevailing tradition of his church. He was attracted to ethical theology, an attempt to mediate the gospel and modern thought. Kuyper appealed to him to be clear in his objections to this mediating theology but was never satisfied with Bavinck’s criticism – it was not strong enough. Bavinck remained within the Secession Church and, in time, became Kuyper’s successor at the Free University. He wrote his Gereformeerde Dogmatiek and in the first volume enunciated the theological foundations upon which his work was built. The objective principle of knowledge is primary: the Holy Scriptures. He was viewed, according to Berkhof, as “the faithful theological partisan and alter ego of Kuyper.” Yet Berkhof notes that apart from the second edition of his dogmatics and a onevolume summary, Bavinck produced little in the field of dogmatics during his years at the Free University, and nothing that was new and original. He observes, He [Bavinck] felt increasingly that the modern period needed a much more vigorous renewal of theology than he himself had produced or was able to produce. Particularly the issues arising from the historical-critical interpretation of Scripture needed a very different approach. (p. 113) Berkhof goes on to say that Bavinck’s views on the issues at stake became increasingly relativistic, and, in 1910, he sold a large part of his dogmatics library; during these years his interest turned to issues posed by culture. © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page13   Berkhof writes that after 1900 “Bavinck increasingly felt that his theological direction was leading to a dead end.” Was it only historical-critical research that undermined his earlier certainty? Berkhof asks. Or was it deeper? Did he finally yield to his earlier fascination with ethical theology, recognizing that the issue between it and his Reformed orthodoxy was not really an issue between theocentricity and anthrocentricity, but rather between intellectualism and personalism? Is faith submission to the authority of scripture truths or is it the personal encounter with God through the person of Christ by which we are transformed into personalities? Bavinck opted for the priority of the scripture principle, . . . Hence Bavinck remained more strongly burdened than he wished by the legacy of the Reformed scholasticism of the seventeenth century and gave up intellectual tools he could not well do without in the continuing confrontation with the modern spirit. (p. 114) One cannot help but wonder why Bavinck’s latter years were not more fruitful. Why did he sell most of his dogmatics library? Why did his interest turn to issues in the broader culture? Berkhof does not speculate, but he does tell us that Bavinck felt his theological direction was leading to a dead end. Could it be that he sensed he was stuck? Was he not perhaps blocked from fruitful engagement with modern thought by his own objective principle of knowledge, the holy Scriptures? Indeed, not by Scripture as such, but by Scripture as understood by premodern seventeenth-century Reformed scholasticism, a view still prevalent in present-day Reformed orthodoxy. Scripture itself is the cumulative translation of tradition over several centuries. Where it is not valued as an inspired human witness to encounter with the living God, but rather as a book of absolute truths not only about God but also about science, cosmology, anthropology, and history, how can genuine dialogue with ongoing human intellectual and spiritual development be engaged in? It is impossible. Given Bavinck’s ecclesiastical context, to raise that issue would have been fruitless; it would not have been tolerated. Reformed theology in this country faces the same dilemma. Its doctrine of Scripture has remained immune from the acids of criticism, and an authoritarian use of Scripture continues, making it impossible either to engage the cultural assumptions that remain as a legacy of the Enlightenment, or to capture the attention of an obviously spiritually destitute and groping present generation where the yearning for transcendence is pervasive. Perhaps the insights and breakthroughs in science and the spiritual bankruptcy of the West have created the moment that will compel us to move beyond both the theological impasse traced above and an authoritarian use of Scripture. In his biography of Karl Barth, Eberhard Busch records a conversation of Barth in which he referred to being dubbed orthodox. That was fine with Barth, if it pointed to a willingness “to learn from the Fathers.” © Grand Valley State University �Sleeping Through a Revolution Richard A. Rhem Page14   But he rejected any restriction to the doctrinal position of any teacher, school or confession.... “Confessions” exist for us to go through them (not once but continually), not for us to return to them, take up our abode in them, and conduct our further thinking from their standpoint and in bondage to them. (Karl Barth, p. 375) That is the freedom we must discover in order to enter the contemporary discussion, bringing the richness of Reformed theology into engagement with a postmodern world. References: Hendrikus Berkhof. Two Hundred Years of Theology, report of a personal journey. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989, translation by John Vriend of 200 Jahre Theologie: Ein Reisebericht, 1985) Hans Küng. Paradigm Change in Theology: A Symposium for the Future. David Tracy, editor. Crossroad Publishing Co., 1989. Hans Küng. Theology for the Third Millennium: An Ecumenical View. Anchor, reprint edition, 1990. James B. Miller. Postmodern Theology: Christian Faith in a Pluralist World. Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2006. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References H. Berkhof, 200 Years of Theology, 1989, Hans Küng, Paradigm Change in Theology, 1989, Theology for the 3rd Millennium, 1990, James Miller, Postmodern Theology, 2006 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19910401 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991-04-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Sleeping Through a Revolution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 1, 1991 entitled "Sleeping Through a Revolution", it appeared in Perspectives, April 1991, pp. 8-14. Tags: Reformed Theology, Orthodoxy, Historical Thinking, Faith, Postmodern, Nature of Religious Development. Scripture references: H. Berkhof, 200 Years of Theology, 1989, Hans Küng, Paradigm Change in Theology, 1989, Theology for the 3rd Millennium, 1990, James Miller, Postmodern Theology, 2006. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Faith Historical Thinking Nature of Religious Development Orthodoxy PostModern Reformed Theology https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/13a9d00a7f2ecf09fa68f37cf629635f.pdf 5cf0aa85d70012645b8362c29ecbde7b PDF Text Text Peace Among the Churches Editorial by Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Published in Perspectives A Journal of Reformed Thought October 1990, p. 3 As I write, the Middle East is at flash point. Saddam Hussein is calling the Muslim masses to a holy war, even though he himself has been one of the most secular of Arab leaders, allowing the fundamentalists no access to power in Iraq. Television news again brings us scenes reminiscent of the Iranian hostage crisis of some years ago. A Muslim cleric leads a huge congregation in prayers to Allah and then leads them in a rhythmic chant, “Death to America.” Hussein calls up images of the great Babylonian empire of ancient times and would appear to see himself as the new Nebuchadnezzar, firing the passion and imagination of Arabic masses with visions of a return to the greatness and glory of ancient time. It is not difficult to discredit Hussein, to puncture the logic of his rhetoric. One ought to be scandalized by his bald abuse of religion to incite people to hatred and to war. And it is difficult not to feel hostility for Muslim masses chanting “Death to America” and burning the American flag. Still, before righteous indignation rises up within us and rage consumes us, we must remember the tortured history of the region and especially the history of the last decades. The tangled web of Middle East affairs knows no boundary between the just and the unjust, the selfless and the selfish. So it has been throughout history. It was a holy war that Joshua waged against Canaan, the “Promised Land.” I wonder what it felt like to be a citizen of Jericho when the walls came tumbling down. But that is different, you say. God gave Israel the land. Canaan’s bloodbath was God’s judgment on their wickedness. Simple. Maybe. Maybe too simple. World history is history’s judgment, and certainly the biblical God is history’s sovereign, staying with creation, engaged with history’s unfolding drama. God’s prophets saw conquering pagan rulers as instruments of God’s judgment and grace. The poet of Lamentations who prayed God to curse conquering Babylon, © Grand Valley State University   �Peace Among the Churches Richard A. Rhem Page 2   sounding strangely like “Death to America” (3:64-66), also recognized Judah’s sinful recalcitrance. Where such prophetic insight is present and where humble acknowledgment of involvement in history’s tragic web of evil is confessed, there is hope. But such insight and confession have not always characterized religions, including the Christian church. A heart inflamed with hatred is not a hallmark of Islam; it is an ever-present potential of the human heart. And there is no more devastating instrument for inciting hatred than religion. Hans Küng’s claim made in the February 1990 issue of Perspectives is right: “There will be no peace among the nations... without peace among the religions. There will be no world peace without religious peace!” Muslim, Jew, and Christian have all had their turns at calling on the same God to curse the other. Is it not time rather to bless in the name of the one God? If that be granted, then how urgent it is for us to recognize the ecumenical vocation of the Reformed Church in America suggested by Arie Brouwer in this issue. In a piece appearing in the Christian Century recently, Brouwer cited Henry P. VanDusen, who spoke of “the denominational heresy.” Brouwer went on: Theologically, denominations are best understood as reform movements within the one Church of Christ which are temporarily denominated, or named, according to the reforms they embody until such time as those reforms are received by, and themselves reformed within, the whole Church, at which time the denominations lose their reason for being and cease to exist as separate bodies. Thus understood, denominations are themselves instruments of the ecumenical movement. They are members of the body of Christ struggling to reform and reconnect the body so that it may be whole. (The Christian Century, June 27-July 4, 1990, p. 632) Brouwer’s claim reminded me of the first time such an idea really registered with me. It occurred in an interview conducted by Paul Fries with Hendrikus Berkhof in the first issue of Perspectives. The RCA was trying to discover its identity. Fries asked whether a church can be both Reformed and relevant. Berkhof responded: I am inclined to look at this question from the other side and ask if it can be relevant and thus Reformed?... to focus on these identity problems might be both a sign and fostering of spiritual decline. Witness to a Lord who humbled himself and who was ready to lose his life for the sake of his Father’s kingdom, and for humankind, means that a church should not bother too much about its own identity, but concentrate on the identity of its Lord and his cause. Berkhof went on to explain that Reformed churches have less reason to be concerned with identity than other bodies: “The name implies catholicity and © Grand Valley State University �Peace Among the Churches Richard A. Rhem Page 3   carries the call to constant reform so that the church can become more Reformed.” Born at the crossroad “where traditional and modern in Europe intersect, the Reformed tradition is rooted in the Catholic tradition and open to the future sounding new calls and presenting new possibilities.” Küng is right; there will be no world peace without peace among the religions. But there will be no peace among the religions without peace among the churches. © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19901001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990-10-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Peace Among the Churches Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Editorial created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 1, 1990 entitled "Peace Among the Churches", it appeared in Perspectives, October 1990, p. 3. Tags: Interfaith, Ecumenical, Peace. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Ecumenical Interfaith Peace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7343baf68ec2d1edecdc8126ef3e9296.pdf c1acdd19689a14c2f35f52c77378d5aa PDF Text Text Two Hundred Years of Theology, Report of a Personal Journey by Hendrikus Berkhof (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989, translation by John Vriend of 200 Jahre Theologie: Ein Reisebericht, 1985) 1990 Book Review “A Personal Perspective on a Personal Journey” By Richard A. Rhem Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan Publication of Review Unknown On Christmas, 1990, I spoke with Hendrikus Berkhof. His voice was strong, his mind clear; over the telephone one would not have known but that it was the same “Henk,” full of questions, intensely interested in all that was happening in the world and in the church – and, as always, there was his genuine interest in all that concerned me, my family and church. It was good to hear him thus, but even so I knew he was home for only a few hours from the nursing home where he now makes his home. On May 26 Hendrikus Berkhof was stricken with a cerebral hemorrhage that left him unconscious for two weeks and hospitalized into September. I flew over to see him and his dear wife Corry the first week in July. During those days I could see him make a turn. He recognized me immediately and immediately spoke to me in English, although in very weak voice. With his one good arm he reached out to touch my face, a kind of blessing, realizing I had come to be with him. Paralyzed on his left side, he cannot yet walk and how much progress remains to be made cannot be predicted at this point. My Christmas conversation, however, convinced me that he will keep up the struggle; that great mind and heart will not be muted. Perhaps the most moving aspect of our conversation was his expression of deep gratitude to God whose grace has been experienced richly as Henk and Corry have traversed this valley. In September they celebrated their golden anniversary. With his four children and their families gathered around him he spoke of the goodness and grace of God and God’s faithfulness in the present adversity. That this should be the case is no surprise to me; rather, it is precisely what I should have expected from this Christian gentleman, theologian, preacher, churchman and, for me, mentor and dear friend. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 2 of 41 One of the highest privileges of my life has been the opportunity to study under Hendrikus Berkhof for four years in Leiden and then subsequently to know the richness of intimate friendship with him and Corry. In 1989 we spent ten days together in Scotland, studying together and touring the Highlands. He spoke of our special relationship and denied that it could any longer be termed that of mentor/student. But of course I know better. He will always be my teacher. More than any other he has shaped me as a theologian and pastor. It was thus with great pleasure that I accepted the assignment of reviewing Two Hundred Years of Theology, with the request that I do more than review the book but also give a personal portrait of the author. I received this work almost as a personal gift from my teacher. The two hundred years he surveys from his own personal perspective is precisely the course of theological development I studied with him from 1967 -1970. His Christian Faith, which, after five reprintings, was revised in 1986, will obviously stand as his statement of the Christian faith as it comes to expression within the Reformed tradition in the last quarter of the twentieth century. But Two Hundred Years of Theology reveals the man in the passion of his life – to bring to expression the Gospel in such a fashion that it engages the minds and hearts of the contemporary generation. Obviously, to survey two hundred years of theology is to reflect on that endeavor to bring the Gospel to expression over many generations. But the sharp focus of the study consists precisely in the manner in which that task was executed in the several generations surveyed. There was much that transpired during the two-hundred-year period that receives no attention or is mentioned only in passing. Berkhof makes no claim to give a full review of theological inquiry for the period. His intention, clearly stated, is to trace the respective attempts to bridge the Gospel proclamation and modern thought. Ever and again and with increasing intensity I asked myself how, speaking generally, these two can coexist.... (p. xi) Modern thought, set in opposition to the Gospel, is the thought that arose in the epoch of the Enlightenment. (Berkhof uses the term “post-Enlightenment” to designate the two hundred years under review. That should not be confused with the designation of our present time as the Post-Enlightenment period in the sense of moving beyond the assumptions of the Enlightenment). Berkhof’s focus is theological thought in face of the assumptions of the Enlightenment. In the eighteenth century...modern thought assumed the position of leadership in European culture. Since then, as “self-evident” truth in cultured circles, it stripped from the Christian worldview its halo of self-evident truth which it had held in Europe for almost a thousand years. (p. xii) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 3 of 41 Berkhof was nurtured in the Reformed tradition as it came to expression in the Calvinism of the Netherlands. At the close of a long and fruitful career in the church and the university, preaching and teaching Christian faith, Berkhof surveys the dialogue of Christian theology and modern thought over the past two hundred years to satisfy his own curiosity first of all, for he recognizes that his whole ministry has been the articulation of the faith in the face of modern thought in the wake of the Enlightenment which overthrew all authoritarian structures in state and church and declared the autonomy of the human person. Berkhof’s strength and great gift to the Reformed tradition and the whole church is the articulation of the faith in face of modern thought, having earned his right to address the contemporary scene because of the seriousness with which he has grappled with modern thought, doing so with sensitivity, genuinely seeking to hear and understand; doing so with openness and humility, seeking insight on the way to a deeper grasp of truth; doing so with appreciation for the positive aspects of the broader culture. In his effort to understand and in his honest appreciation for the modern world of Western civilization he never lost sight of the fundamental contradiction of the sovereign and gracious Creator and the creaturely claim to autonomy – the discontinuity between God and humankind, the impossible gulf that separates the two, a gulf that can be bridged only from the side of God as an act of pure grace, a gulf that has been bridged in Jesus Christ. For me, coming under the tutelage of a person of such breadth of scholarship who evidenced at the same time a deeply personal Christian experience and commitment to the faith in its Reformed perspective, but with the enrichment of broad ecumenical appreciation, it was a whole new world. I was amazed at the gap in my own theological education: thorough through the sixteenth century but almost totally lacking in the whole development of modern thought, the thought patterns that have shaped the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, thought patterns that must be engaged in any responsible proclamation of the Gospel in the contemporary world. I may have been at fault, not being ready or willing to hear the claims of philosophical thinking in the wake of the Enlightenment. What I missed completely, for whatever reason, was the factor that changes everything – the rise of historical consciousness that developed on the continent in the eighteenth century and led to what is now taken for granted in our culture, namely, that all biblical, theological, philosophical and ideological statements are conditioned by the historical context in which they arise. Fortunately, when the force of this revolution in human understanding took hold of me, I was under the careful and caring guidance of one whose whole life has been a passionate pursuit of bringing to expression the grace of God as it has been manifested in the ambiguity of the historical situation. Two things became strikingly evident to me: my own orthodox Reformed faith understanding was not a timeless expression of eternal truth but a timely confession of Christian faith shaped in the tumultuous context of sixteenth-century Europe. Secondly, the whole development of modern theology which I had viewed negatively, as threat, was an attempt to translate the © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 4 of 41 gospel into terms that took cognizance of the Copernican turn in human understanding effected by critical analyses of the knowing process and by the rise of historical consciousness. In other words, it was an attempt to do what the church is always called to do – to articulate the gospel in every generation and in the context of every historical epoch. From Hendrikus Berkhof I learned to listen with appreciation and openness to the broad spectrum of expressions of the Christian faith in the respective periods in which they were articulated. I learned, to borrow Clarence Becker’s phrase, that “the climate of opinion” in any given period is so powerful and controlling that often an honest attempt to bring the gospel to expression will end poorly with only a truncated message coming through. But even so I learned to value the effort and to learn, both from those efforts that were somewhat successful, and from those that lost the message in a maze of human reasoning. Hendrikus Berkhof is a gifted scholar. To read Two Hundred Years of Theology, one recognizes immediately that one is reading an author who has a thorough grasp of the subject matter, who has fully digested the thought of the persons about whom he writes and that, with an encyclopedic grasp of the thought development, he is not content simply to render a survey but rather goes on to critique, to question and finally to put his own feet down over against that which he has set forth. His own account of the faith which one finds in his Christian Faith is thus his own; arising out of a thorough grasp of the tradition out of which he speaks, the whole development of dogma in the history of the church, and a broad engagement with modern thought. The thinkers whom he treats in Two Hundred Years, …tried, more or less deliberately, to build a bridge between the gospel and their secularized cultural environment, but did they succeed? Were they able to translate the gospel into modern language such that it could again be heard and understood in intellectual circles and elicit a genuine yes or no? But who is able to judge whether they achieved this goal? We probably cannot say more than this: from where we stand now, this or that attempt seems to us successful or unsuccessful. Such assessment is important, for we are in the same situation and can learn, both in a positive and in a negative way, from preceding generations. (p. xiii) Berkhof invites us to join him in his personal journey through two hundred years. Beginning with Kant, Berkhof recognizes that the dialogue of theology and modern thought is a dialogue between theology and philosophy. The great German philosophical tradition was carried on by those who had genuine theological interest and involvement. From the development of philosophy, theologians gained knowledge of the modern person’s understanding of life. Throughout the study Berkhof will again and again point to the Lebensgefühl, life understanding, sense of life, that was influential in shaping theological expression. His survey will highlight those persons who acknowledged the © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 5 of 41 new situation for theology after the critical analysis of the knowing process by Immanuel Kant and insight in the milieu of modern thought to proclaim the gospel. Before we can fully appreciate the seismic shift in philosophical and theological thought effected by Kant’s critical analysis of the knowing process we need some sense of the pre-modern world. With the overwhelming influence of Aristotelian philosophy brought to the west by Averroës in the twelfth century, the Church was faced with the necessity of proclaiming its message in some sort of accommodation with Aristotle. Thomas Aquinas provided the synthesis which made room for Christian theology in an Aristotelian intellectual climate. This was a major accomplishment but the synthesis exacted a price: reality was now split into two realities, nature and supernature. A virtual metaphysical dualism was constructed separating the heavenly sphere from the earthly. For the latter, reason reigned supreme; the former was accessible to faith. Thus a bifurcation of reality resulted in a bifurcation of the knowing process. This split in reality would bear bitter fruit but it did forestall the onset of atheistic thought which became a dominant stream of modern thought in the period surveyed by Berkhof. Berkhof begins his personal journey with the critical analysis of epistemology by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). His Critique of Pure Reason (1781) is broadly acknowledged as the foundational work of German philosophy and, Berkhof contends, it must also be valued “as a radical new beginning for evangelical theology.” As a result of its appearance, orthodox scholasticism, rationalism, and supernaturalism found that, at a single stroke, the road forward had been blocked. In addition, the appearance of Kant’s Critique meant...the birth of the new theology, or rather: the modern way of posing questions, and modern methodology, in theology. (p. 1f) The pre-modern worldview had achieved a harmony between nature and grace, reason and faith, Aquinas offering the consummate articulation of that harmony. As James Miller writes: By the eve of the birth of modern culture, the relation between Aristotelian science (including a geocentric cosmological model developed by the secondcentury astronomer Ptolemy) and Christian theology had become so integral that it was virtually impossible to determine where one stopped and the other began. As a consequence, it was difficult to see how a philosophical or cosmological challenge to the system of Aristotelian natural philosophy could be anything less than a challenge to theological orthodoxy as well. Thus, the stage was set for the Copernican-Galilean controversy out of which modern culture emerged and in which natural science as a discipline became independent of the intellectual or theological authority of the Christian church. (Postmodern Theology, p. 2) Separating Thomas Aquinas and the Thomistic harmonization of the natural and the supernatural and Immanuel Kant are four centuries which saw the Renaissance turning © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 6 of 41 to the human subject, the Reformation which could only have happened in a culture already permeated by Renaissance influence but which some would contend was a detour, a conservative reaction rather than a development of the ferment of the fifteenth century, and the birth of modern philosophy in the work of Descartes. The linkage between the pre-modern culture described above and Kant’s critical philosophy, however, should not be missed. The Enlightenment was the flowering of the Renaissance turning to the human subject. The bold declaration was the autonomy of the human person no longer under the tutelage of authoritarian structures, be they ecclesiastical (church or Scripture) or sociopolitical. The early representatives of philosophy had never at the onset of the modern period remained faithful to the church and lived in two houses: their critical analysis of thought and scientific experimentation was carried on in the autonomy of human reason; their spiritual existence was the appropriation of God’s grace, mediated through the church – this tidy possibility provided by Thomas’ dual structure of reality. It was not long however before the modern thinker found the supernatural realm optional; the autonomous human person found that critical rationality was quite sufficient to deal with “the real world;” the church remained a spiritual home for those who needed it. Enter Immanuel Kant. This is the beginning point of Berkhof’s journey because Kant’s analysis of the human knowing process changed everything. In his Critique of Pure Reason he destroyed the traditional proofs for the existence of God and struck terror in the hearts of conservative theologians. Actually his purpose was positive. He himself wrote, “I therefore had to abolish knowledge in order to make room for belief.” For him faith and knowledge were complementary. They were separate but connected and both were necessary. It is Berkhof’s contention that it was “Kant’s purpose to save religion as well as the Enlightenment: in this double objective, we think, lay his deepest passion as a thinker.” (p. 5) Dividing the realm of knowledge into two fundamentally separate domains, he posited the world of phenomena and the world of the noumena. The former was accessible to human reason – empirical knowledge which was not a direct mirror of the natural world but the product of the interaction of the knowing mind and the data of the senses. This he called the knowledge of the phenomenal world. The noumenal world consisted of things in themselves – the world apart from the activity of the knowing subject – that which simply was not available to empirical verification because no sensory experience was possible. For example, the universe as a causal whole, the human self as a free agent, and God. Yet precisely these three realities must exist, must be true. To cite James Miller again: Therefore, though knowledge of the world as a whole, of the self, and of God were denied by Kant, faith in them, he argued, was absolutely necessary for practical reasons. (Postmodern Theology, p. 5) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 7 of 41 This assertion was set forth in his second critical work, The Critique of Practical Reason. It is this fundamental dualism that has characterized modern culture; it is the inheritance of the Enlightenment and it is the “climate of opinion” that has dominated the modern period, the milieu in which two hundred years of theology has been executed. How did the Gospel come to expression in light of the limits of human knowing in a world where the authority of tradition and Scripture was no longer self-evident? This is Berkhof’s focus. He deals with the development of the German philosophical tradition because German philosophers were so theologically self-conscious and aware: Fichte and the beginning of the Romantic movement which included the great Schleiermacher who remained a theologian and pastor and sought to articulate the Gospel to its “cultured despisers,” many of whom made up his own circle of friends; and, of course, Hegel in whom German Idealism reached its fullest expression. Berkhof is comfortably at home in this philosophical dimension and is able to lift the philosophical threads that shaped the theological tapestry of the nineteenth century. Without some degree of philosophical orientation one can hardly begin to understand the theological thinking that came to expression in this 200-year period – or in any period for that matter. How can we understand Schleiermacher, regarded as the father of modern Protestant theology, except in the background of Kant? If Kant successfully blocked the road to the knowledge of God through rational enquiry, through metaphysical speculation, then what road remains open and on what basis can knowledge of God be grounded? Schleiermacher turned to the interior life of the individual – to “the feeling of absolute dependence,” an experience he claimed was common to all humankind at some time or other. As Berkhof is careful to point out, Schleiermacher was not claiming that Christianity arose from the feeling of dependence; rather, this feeling is the human precondition for it. He was pointing to the place into which revelation enters. Was he successful in bringing Christian faith to expression amidst its cultured despisers? Berkhof observes, One can hardly say that history proved him right. What he took such pains to formulate as the method of theology after the Enlightenment has become, consciously or unconsciously, the common property of the greater proportion of theologians. But there were, and are, only very few “Schleiermachians.” The actual execution of his design has prompted many to admire but few to imitate him. For some it was too radical; for others too traditional; and, of course, both possibilities were inherent in this method. (p. 46) Berkhof entitled the chapter “Schleiermacher’s Direction” because he understands Schleiermacher as having had a distinct base and goal. The base was the modernity which he totally affirmed. The goal was redemption in Christ, a subject which in his own time he wanted to express in all its fullness. Throughout his lifetime he was on his way from that base to this goal. (p. 48) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 8 of 41 Berkhof’s sense is that he was so caught up with the base that it is questionable whether he really reached his goal. Barth wrestled with Schleiermacher throughout his remarkable career. Strong rejection alternates with obvious admiration as Barth deals with this one who so strongly shaped the nineteenth century, which Barth had so strongly rejected in his own radical turn from his inherited liberalism to the theology of the Word. Berkhof, observing the whole movement from Schleiermacher to Barth, renders the opinion that They were both in motion from the same base (Woher) to the same goal (Wohin)... (p. 49). Only viewed thus in their commonality of concern, Berkhof contends, can the great difference between them come to light. The delight and profit of accompanying Berkhof on his journey is to learn from him the relationships and inter-connections that constitute the theological landscape of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He concludes the chapter on Schleiermacher with this paragraph: It is no accident that suddenly we have moved from Schleiermacher to our own time. As the first to think through so deeply the problems of modern theology, he is just as up-to-date and relevant for us as he was for his contemporaries. Perhaps we have to say: more relevant. For in his day most theologians had as yet no inkling of what the problems were and could therefore lightheartedly shrug off Schleiermacher’s answers. The bigger the blueprint, the longer the time before it takes effect. (p.49) We will go on to deal with Ritschl and the line of German theological development, but we must note here another alternative to Kant’s destruction of a reasoned proof of the existence of God. Schleiermacher moved to the interior life of the human subject; the Danish Lutheran theologian, Sören Kierkegaard, in strong reaction against Hegel’s idealism, pointed to the concretely existing individual who is confronted by the revelation of Jesus Christ and is called to conversion, to the leap of faith in the moment of decision. Sketching Kierkegaard’s Philosophical Fragments, Berkhof writes, Only in the paradox of the God-man can one lay hold of the unity of the eternal and the historical; and this paradox is only acknowledged in faith. This faith has nothing to do with one’s intelligence or will. It is itself as much a paradox as the paradox with which it enters into a positive and happy relationship. Faith, therefore, is purely a gift received in the “moment” in which the eternal appears in time and by which the learner becomes “contemporaneous” with the teacher. In this contemporaneity, this leap from sinful alienation from God into existence, the historical distance from Jesus, who is now contemporaneous, falls away. (p. 74) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 9 of 41 Kierkegaard reacted strongly against Hegel not only, but also against confessional orthodoxy of his day, for there too, he claimed, the individual was pushed aside just as much by universal and objective truths. Berkhof sees Kierkegaard as an important figure in the relationship between culture and gospel: He brought the Christian faith into conflict with the Zeitgeist, doing this, however, in the concepts of that time. Having in his language become an idealist to the idealists, he proclaimed to them the faith in a new way so that it no longer appeared to them as something antiquated but as a stumbling block and folly. He did not do this by way of a fresh interpretation of dogma and tradition.... The new and contemporary dimension consisted in the fact that he focused the whole of revelation on the goal of subjectivity and by that means placed it in a new light. (p. 76) Was Kierkegaard the “most thoroughly reflective completion of pietism”? Berkhof raises the question but notes this critical difference: Whereas pietism presupposed and maintained the orthodox system of doctrine, Kierkegaard made its content existential. Kierkegaard failed to impact his own time and subsequent decades took little note of him, but the alternative he posed to both the liberalism flowing from Hegel’s idealism and confessional orthodoxy came to flower in the twentieth century in the early Barth and in the theology of Rudolf Bultmann. Following a discussion of Hegel and the Hegelian left, those thinkers that moved from Hegel’s system to atheism, Berkhof discusses “the after-effects of idealism in theology,” portraying the two streams that issued in confessionalism and liberalism. Berkhof points out: Two theological points of view were dominant here...: One could either, in company with Hegel, look in Christianity for the truth of universal reason (and run the risk of subordinating the gospel to the spirit of culture (Kulturgeist), or one could join Schleiermacher in proceeding from the independent source and nature of the gospel (and run the danger of isolating the gospel from the culture). This contrast led to two distinct theological schools. (p. 62) The first school, the liberal wing, Berkhof designates as the “Hegelian school” but he does not deal with this line because it lies outside his sharp focus. The second school, “the confessional group, the theology of mediation, gets major treatment because precisely here the bridge between gospel and culture was the center. The roots of this theology lie in Schleiermacher but there was little of the brilliance of Schleiermacher and the effectiveness of the movement was slight in terms of negotiating a dialogue with © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 10 of 41 culture. It did serve to strengthen the church – it was, in Berkhof’s words “an ecclesiastical modality;” it had “a saving influence internally.” Both the liberal and mediating theological groups declined abruptly with the rise of Ritschl’s influence in the 1870’s. This causes Berkhof to raise questions directly related to his own special interest. Both schools wanted to translate Christian truth into the idiom of modern consciousness (Lebensgefühl). And for both, this Lebensgefühl was unquestionably the atmosphere created by German idealistic philosophy. In that regard, however, both were fundamentally wrong. Already when those schools arose, idealism was close to its demise. (p. 68) The important insight here is that theologians that valued being up-to-date – related to the climate of opinion of the day – failed to sense that their cultural context was moving beyond them. Here is Berkhof’s statement: The worlds of Feuerbach and Comte, of Marx and Engels, the achievements of science, technology, and industry, the struggle of the working class, the “signs of the times” of 1848, and later the German translation of Darwin’s main work (1863) – all these events and influences occurred out of the hearing range of theological studies and lecture halls.... The theologians could not find a point of contact in the new empiricistic, naturalistic, and atheistic culture of Europe, as they had found it in the world of idealism. (p. 68) Berkhof does not fault theologians alone for this failure to sense where modern thought was going. Even “enlightened” members of the educated class shrank back from the forward movement of Enlightenment thought. Idealism as far back as the Hellenistic beginnings of the church, seemed the gospel’s native air; with this new intellectual climate there seemed no possibility of establishing a relationship. Albrecht Ritschl, according to Berkhof, was the first “to fling a plausible bridge in German theology to the Lebensgefühl of realism.” In the decade of the 1870’s Ritschl’s work had a major impact because, Berkhof contends, “what many scholars had felt unconsciously came suddenly to the surface: liberal and mediating theology had attempted to relate the gospel to a world that was no longer there.” What these theologians in both camps failed to recognize was that to make the gospel audible in the modern world requires the change of conceptual apparatus and theological language with the changing cultural climate and this means as well that any such theological construction will, given time, become obsolete. Berkhof gives a sympathetic treatment of Ritschl, acknowledging his considerable shortcomings, but valuing him for his serious effort to give voice to the gospel in a shifting cultural scene. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 11 of 41 The cultural mood in Germany turned more and more to the world of experience and the natural laws governing it. The reality of space and time gained much more weight and a much clearer autonomy than an idealistically disposed mind could handle. Still, this reality was not experienced in a deterministic fashion. The experience of the mechanisms of nature went hand in hand with a strong sense of progress, of human freedom and power. Humanity is clearly not a product and plaything of the powers of nature but superior to them as their ruler. By utilizing the predictable laws of nature humanity can establish a realm of progress that becomes ever more free. (p. 115f) This was the cultural mood into which Ritschl addressed his theological understanding. He moved from Hegelian idealism to open-minded research utilizing the historicalcritical method. He was serious, disciplined, wanting to be “heart and soul, a believing Christian, and at the same time belonging with the entire fabric of his life to his own culture and time.” Turning from Hegelian idealism to Kant’s critical idealism, he fluctuated in his relationship to Kant but seemed finally convinced that metaphysics and natural theology were no longer options. He held that the knowledge of God is realized only in the act of faith – faith directed toward the saving activity of Christ. Religious knowledge he claimed consists in value judgments, a term by which he is best known and most misunderstood. Berkhof cites him thus: “It is the duty of theology to conserve the special characteristics of the conception of God, namely, that it can only be represented in value-judgments.” Berkhof observes: He intends to maintain the uniqueness of the Christian faith as a way of access to the “conception of God” through trust in Jesus Christ – apart from any ground other than that given in the unity of revelation and faith. In that context he utilized Kant to the extent Kant is useful... (p. 121) Berkhof defends Ritschl against a common misunderstanding that with the concept of value judgment he delivered the Christian faith to pure subjectivism. But, Berkhof counters, the word value was much in vogue at the time and it intended to represent the autonomy of the world of the mind vis-a-vis the mechanism of nature. Berkhof cites two significant statements in which Ritschl explains his use of the word: Religious knowledge moves in independent value-judgments, which relate to man’s attitude to the world, and call forth feelings of pleasure or pain, in which man either enjoys the dominion over the world vouchsafed him by God, or feels grievously the lack of God’s help to that end. (Justification and Reconciliation, p. 205, cited in Berkhof, p. 122). In Christianity, religious knowledge consists in independent value judgments, inasmuch as it deals with the relation between the blessedness which is assured by God and sought by man, and the whole of the world which God has created and rules in harmony with His final end. (p. 207) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 12 of 41 Ritschl is striving to explain the relationship between divine providence and human dominion over the world. He also used the concept in dealing with the divinity of Christ and religious knowledge. Berkhof sets forth Ritschl’s intent sympathetically but acknowledges that the word value judgment...is misleading; it creates the impression that it is solely grounded in subjective human appreciation, as a postulate or projection, without having an objective context. Ritschl’s line of thought was not at all intended anthropocentrically but relationally and functionally... : in the face of the saving encounter with the Christ of revelation a person finds himself forced to make this judgment. (p. 123) Ritschl was welcomed by many who “in the age of Emperor Wilhelm II understood and welcomed this presentation of the gospel as moral power.” Others saw it as “a betrayal of the gospel to the spirit of bourgeoisie” and Berkhof observes that this is the fate of every theology that seek to articulate the gospel for its own time and culture. In any case he “let the voice of the gospel and the voices of the Reformation speak again.” One of his students who was to become the philosopher of religion of the religioushistorical school, Ernst Troeltsch, described Ritschl’s position thus, according to Berkhof: In his relation to history Ritschl remained stuck halfway. In this respect he seems to identify with the historical consciousness which marks the modern mind, though at bottom he is not modern at all but still supernaturalistic. One cannot simultaneously recognize the limited individuality and many-sided dependence of all historical figures on the one hand, and on the other, infer from the historical process the absoluteness of Christianity and its founders.... (p. 129) That was Troeltsch’s conclusion and he turned away from Ritschl developing to the full the implications of historical consciousness which he faulted his teacher for failing to do. Berkhof’s journey continues with a discussion of the alternative positions of Troeltsch and Wilhelm Herrmann who was deeply impacted by Ritschl and developed the line of thought he found in Ritschl in his own impressive work. We begin with Herrmann because he developed the intention of Ritschl’s theology. What impressed him about Ritschl, Berkhof notes, was his fundamental theme: “The calling of people to relate and conduct themselves as free personalities within a determined world.” Like Ritschl he found the highest of religion and morality united in the figure of Jesus. Faith and knowledge were held distinct as was true in Ritschl following Kant’s critical philosophy. This separation of faith and knowledge was evidenced in “his persistent struggle against any form of confusion between a personal faith in Christ and faith in the authority of Scripture, dogma, or creed: © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 13 of 41 They cannot bring about a saving personal encounter; they appeal to our thinking only as law. Religion is a totally independent world, though closely bound up with morality, because it relates us to divine revelation and must be the answer to the misery of our moral condition. (p. 144) Herrmann was more concerned for the solidity of his philosophical base than was Ritschl. Kant loomed large, “whose mighty thoughts emerge increasingly in almost all domains of human learning as the silent governor of all true research.” Herrmann valued Kant “because in every connection he has placed the value of faith, its independence from science, in the clearest light.” Berkhof offers an illuminating image by which to understand Herrmann in relation to the question of Berkhof’s quest – how in modern thought and culture the gospel was brought to expression. When I read Herrmann what emerges in my mind is the image of a rock in the midst of a rising flood. In Ritschl the rock of moral autonomy still had a broad surface. Now, however, with the waves of the flood rising higher and higher, it became much narrower. The parts that are closer to the sea – like corporeality, psychological development, history, social relationships, and the authority of Scripture and Christian tradition – have clearly been inundated. Herrmann now withdrew to the narrow center, to individual (though conceived as interpersonal) inwardness where the individual is in communion with God through “the inner life of Jesus.” With a splendid sort of consistency, he devoted his intellectual powers to the defense of the peak of that rock. (p. 146) The rise of the historical-critical method of biblical research led Herrmann to realize that the certainty of faith could not rest on the probable results of historical criticism. Faith does take shape in history but its basis is above history and beyond the reach of historical research. “The inner life of Jesus” which comes to expression in the narratives about him, legendary as well as historical, bring our personhood into contact with the reality of Jesus’ personal life. Berkhof dates Herrmann’s complete divorce between revelation and history around 1910, the period of the heated debates about the historicity of Jesus. The Ritschlian school attacked Kähler’s distinction between the historische Jesus and the geschichtliche Christ. This distinction which, as Berkhof notes, can only be made in German, became very influential. It gained broad acceptance because it promised a separate but peaceful relationship between the gospel and modern historicism which could serve as a bomb-proof bunker for faith in Christ. (p. 147) In his Ethik Herrmann entered into dialogue with the intellectual Umwelt and thus Berkhof focuses on that work first because in it “a bridge was built between the gospel and the modern world.” In human encounters in which trust relationships grow we recognize an “unconditional demand” and a longing to achieve “a different life than nature can furnish us.” © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 14 of 41 In religion man is referred to the “inner situation of human individualism” in which “he is faced before a power before which all resistance is excluded because he knows himself to be totally dependent on it in free surrender.” (p. 147f) Herrmann’s other major work Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott describes how the encounter with the superior personal life of Jesus proceeds and effects inner human renewal. How does the saving experience of the grace of God come about? Herrmann’s stress is on inward transformation – concrete human experience. A fact of redemption, for a person who wants to escape the bondage of his own powerlessness, can only be that which transforms him inwardly. That, however, is effected only by his own experience, not by that which he is merely told about. Hence we call a ‘fact of redemption’ the inner life of Jesus which became known to us in contact with the tradition. (p. 148) How does the process of becoming known actually occur? The personal mystery of Jesus is mediated to us through the transmission of his image. In that context we discover that “the Christ of the New Testament displays a firmness of religious conviction, a clarity of moral judgment, a purity and power of will, as they occur together in no other figure of history. (p. 148) Sounding like Luther, Herrmann writes, God takes our self-esteem and creates for us an unbreakable spirit; he destroys our joy in life and makes us blessed; he kills and makes us alive. (Der Verkehr, p. 94, cited in Berkhof, p. 149) Berkhof points out the difference with Luther being that for Luther it is the power of the law that kills while for Herrmann it is a natural human experience, an experience common to Christians and non-Christians. This was the Lebensgefühl of Herrmann’s Europe. The Gospel meets this need reflected in the common human experience. Berkhof puts the critical question to Herrmann’s formulation: “Is the God who is complementarily related to our needs still really God? Or is he perhaps only the projected reflection of human ideals and human misery? Berkhof notes, as we shall see later, that in the year Herrmann died (1922), the revised edition of Barth’s The Epistle to the Romans appeared. In it Barth, Herrmann’s admiring student, concluded that indeed Herrmann’s God was a human projection, not the “wholly other” of biblical revelation. Two alternatives flowed from Ritschl: Herrmann’s development of Ritschl’s intention and, from Ritschl’s student Ernst Troeltsch, a rejection of the attempt to ground faith in inner experience, thereby finding an absolute ground in history. With Herrmann, Troeltsch was recognized as the leader of German Liberal theology. But Troeltsch took another path. Recalling the image referred to above, Berkhof writes, © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 15 of 41 He [Troeltsch] also saw that the rock of ethical freedom and, connected with it, of the gospel was inundated by the deterministic-historical way of thinking in vogue. But he did not believe that he could occupy and hold a small peak as a last resort. He left this tight spot and plunged into the stream. To him an absolute moment in history was a contradiction in terms. For that reason he had to disagree with Ritschl and Herrmann, who sought to lift Jesus out of history with its laws of analogy and correlation. It is true everywhere and for everyone: history is an ever-moving stream in which the movement of each drop is determined by the mass of water that proceeds it, and each drop shares in determining the direction of what follows. That is the fundamental view of “historicism,” another term for determinism applied to historical reality. (p. 150) In that paragraph, Berkhof pictures vividly the climate of opinion created by the rise of historical consciousness and the rise of historical consciousness has marked all subsequent modern thought as indelibly as has Kant’s analysis of the human knowing process. Troeltsch admired Herrmann’s work but concluded that Herrmann had failed to ground faith in an historically unconditional place; rather, his orientation to “the inner life of Jesus” was “time conditional,” thoroughly enmeshed in the stream of history. Troeltsch endeavored to rescue Christian faith and ethics from the historical relativism which appeared all-encompassing. For him the historical as such can have only relative significance. However, utilizing metaphysical psychology, he developed his “philosophy of values.” Whereas the natural sciences look for causality and universality, the science of history looks for the individuality which expresses itself in the realization of transindividual values in history. (p. 152) With this theory of the transhistorical values realized in history in the individual, Troeltsch believed he had overcome relativism. History has not a limitless number of competing values; “such values are exceedingly few in number” and “disclosures of really new goals for the human spirit are rare indeed.” By what criterion are such disclosures to be judged? Berkhof cites the following statements from Troeltsch: We may likewise understand the criterion of evaluation as something that emerges within the movement of life as a result of a universal perspective on the one hand, and involvement in the movement on the other. The converging lines evident in these basic features suggest, however, a normative, universally valid goal toward which the whole is directed. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 16 of 41 It is the concept rather, of a common, orienting goal that may from time to time manifest itself in history in clear and distinct preparatory forms but always remains a goal “out in front.” At this point, Berkhof indicates, Troeltsch moves from the historically empirical to metaphysics. Berkhof cites Troeltsch further: This idea [namely, of an absolute goal] requires a turn to the metaphysical, a retracing of all man’s goals and orientations to a transcendent force that activates our deepest stirrings and is connected with the creative core of reality. The various eruptions, breakthroughs, and manifestations of the higher spiritual life are rooted in the goal-oriented character of this force. It stands over against what is merely given in nature and turns up at different points – ...till it has found concentrated expression, from that point on pressing forward to goals that exceed all knowledge and imagination. This is the permanent element in the concept of evolutionary development, which in this case signifies not only a postulate that accompanies all faith in the spiritual life but also a fact of experience that has been manifested with some degree of clarity. (p. 152f) From this position Troeltsch went on to claim for Christianity the highest level of the apprehension of truth. Berkhof comments, It would seem that, with this “absoluteness of Christianity,” an “absoluteness” based on historical development (because “absolute truth belongs to the future and will appear in the judgment of God and the cessation of earthly history.”) Troeltsch came very close to a kind of Hegelian pantheism and immanentism. Over against this, however, there is a strong personalism, because for Troeltsch as a modern person it is precisely the personalistic legacy of Christianity which constitutes a connection of culture, individual life, and progress. (p. 153) Herrmann and Troeltsch carried on a dialogue about the place of history in Christian experience. Troeltsch rejected Herrmann’s appeal to the personality of Jesus while claiming that although mediated by history, what came to expression of the inner life of Jesus was above history and beyond the reach of historical-critical research. Herrmann found it impossible to accept Troeltsch’s idea of development which brought with it the possibility that Jesus might in the future be superseded by a greater revelatory concretion in event or person. In the final analysis they were not so far apart except that Troeltsch appealed to the socio-psychological reality of the Christian community. In Troeltsch’s essay “The Significance of the Historical Existence of Jesus for Faith,” he dealt with the question whether the Christian church can have a future apart from its being grounded in the historicity of Jesus. Berkhof points out, He denies it on grounds of social psychology; without a fellowship, a cult, and a historical personality to ground it, only an individualistic spirituality remains. As © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 17 of 41 such a historically based cult community, Christianity can well maintain itself, even by historical-critical norms. (p. 155) Thus he is close to Ritschl and Herrmann. However, the difference between them lies in the fact that for Troeltsch, his claim is grounded in social-psychology; it is not for him a dogmatic pronouncement. But Troeltsch wearied of the struggle to claim absolute value out of history and historical development. A concluding sentence of his significant The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches reads, “The Truth is – and this is the conclusion of the whole matter – the Kingdom of God is within us.” World War I dealt his view that European culture was the highest stage of ethical-cultural development a blow. Universal history, which was once his starting point, now became a question to him. He began to see that even his central idea of “personality” lacked universal historical validity but was typical for one culture – namely Western culture. Even the basis of his historicism became historicized. Against a boundless relativism he sought shelter in a pantheistic metaphysic....(p. 157) Berkhof concludes the discussion of these two giants of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries under the heading “Convergence and Contrast.” They illustrate two ways in which, “while affirming the contemporary deterministic-empirical culture, one can still speak of ‘the absoluteness’ of Jesus or of Christianity.” Both sought to save faith and modern culture. But Berkhof claims, In their attempts at reconciliation neither Herrmann nor Troeltsch could in the end avoid returning to the supernaturalism they despised. In the case of Herrmann, Jesus – with his unique inner life – remained the big exception and the great miracle in the midst of history. Troeltsch radically exposed himself to the temptation of contemporary culture. But for him, too, Jesus remained the hitherto unsurpassed high point in the great movement of the Spirit. For the sake of redemption of the human personality neither was able to abandon faith in the personhood of God. For the salvation of human beings both men reached for a Beyond – Herrmann for the inner life of Jesus beyond observable history, Troeltsch for the kingdom of redeemed spirits, also beyond history. (p. 160) Concentrating on his own focus in this survey, Berkhof reflects on the contrasts and the convergence of the alternatives followed by Herrmann and Troeltsch. He contends that in the effort to reconcile the gospel and modern culture, one can begin at either pole. The gospel cries out for concentration on the one thing necessary; culture ventures into the full spectrum of life in the world. Beginning with either pole it is difficult to do justice to the other. Finally both Herrmann and Troeltsch experienced and expressed Christian faith entirely within the framework of the cultural presuppositions of their time. After the crisis of World War I both thinkers’ influence waned; yet, the significant intellectual and spiritual effort of both has gained a new hearing. Berkhof claims we have still not been able to free ourselves from the choice between the two and the struggle in which they engaged continues to challenge us into the present. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 18 of 41 We move now to the next generation, to students of Herrmann, who appeared for a brief time to be one in their development and radicalization of Herrmann’s effort to find a secure place for faith to rest beyond the relativities of history and the acids of historical research. Karl Barth’s Romerbrief, first edition, sent shock waves through the world of academic theology and philosophy and his salvo was affirmed by Rudolf Bultmann. Under the title of “The Split in the Herrmann School” Berkhof discusses these two formidable theologians and their followers. The word “split” indicates that the time of apparent agreement was brief; in Bultmann and Barth alternative answers were given to questions of faith and history. Understandably, Berkhof can do little justice to the gigantic theological enterprises of Bultmann and Barth in two chapters comprising about 45 pages. Yet the treatment is helpful because of his sharp focus – the deeply felt chasm between the cultural assumption of their sitz-im-leben and the gospel. Bultmann followed his revered teacher, Herrmann, who thoroughly mistrusted historically ascertainable facts as vehicles of revelation. Bultmann’s mistrust was even greater – closer to Troeltsch at that point, although repeating Troeltsch’s attempt to find some absolute point amidst history’s relativities. In Bultmann, “the Christian experience of faith is not in the conventional sense ‘grounded’; it implies a radical release from empirical certitude.” Berkhof suggests that Troeltsch’s influence may have caused Bultmann to radicalize Herrmann’s position. The Achilles’ heel of Herrmann was, certainly, that for his faith in Jesus he needed a little segment of history, namely, “the inner life of Jesus” or the “secret of his Person,” however nonvisual it might be. Troeltsch did not believe in this rock as a place of refuge to which one could go in the midst of the flood of historical determinism. And Bultmann...had to concur here with the opponent of his teacher. However, unlike Troeltsch he did not plunge into the sea, but believed he could find revelation concerning the sea above the inundated rock, in a higher atmosphere which the flood could not reach, in the free air of human existence addressed by God, on a level of reality which can only be reached by a radical detachment from the world. (p. 164f) Here we hear the echoes of Kant’s distinction between pure and practical reason; the historical Jesus belongs to the first, the preaching of the crucified Jesus to the second. Bultmann was concerned only with the “that” of the life of Jesus; nothing beyond the “that” of his historical existence is relevant for faith. Even Herrmann’s “inner life of Jesus” was surrendered to the relativization of historical criticism. As Berkhof explains, Bultmann wanted to sever the last remaining connection between Historie and Geschichte in order to protect the faith from any and every critical assault on the part of science. (p. 165) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 19 of 41 Barth’s Romans impressed Bultmann. Here he heard an undergirding and development of Herrmann’s theology. Bultmann, a trained New Testament scholar did object to Barth’s interpretation of Paul and he criticized Barth’s understanding of the relationship between revelation and history, an understanding similar to Herrmann’s, falling short of the radical disjunction of faith and history which Bultmann advocated. Berkhof feels that from the beginning Bultmann was more interested in Barth’s statements about the human self than he was in Barth’s primary concern to point to the goodness of God and the objectivity of the Word of God. Berkhof points to the center of Bultmann’s concern in his analysis of human existence which he gained from the early Heidegger, who for a time was his colleague at Marburg. Heidegger’s philosophy of existence presented Bultmann with an understanding of the human condtion into which the gospel is proclaimed. Berkhof cites Bultmann’s statement: For the existential interpretation of human existence says precisely that the human subject (or human being, I might also say) is not without his world, nor even without God insofar as the philosopher regards it as legitimate to speak about God, so that self-understanding is also understanding of (God and) the world. (p. 168f) Is this “natural theology” or a Christianized Heidegger? Berkhof contends the two converge in Bultmann and offers as evidence Bultmann’s statements in his essay “The New Testament and My Theology:” ...according to Heidegger the “mundaneness” of the world “causes people to be satisfied with an illusory existence; as a result they miss out on “the reality of existence.” This condition of lostness is what the New Testament calls “sin.” According to Heidegger people must now lay hold of existence on their own: Become what you are! (p. 169) Philosophy believes it is enough that one be shown one’s true nature but Bultmann denies philosophy’s self-confidence. People must first be liberated from themselves. This happens through the message of Christ, through the forgiveness of sin, by which alone people receive the “freedom for obedience,” surrender to the love of God, and therewith the authenticity of their existence. (p. 169) During the fifties Bultmann’s influence was powerful and pervasive. His existential analysis of the human person who is addressed by the Word of God, the proclamation of the Christ of faith apart from any rooting in history beyond the “that” of Jesus’ existence, enabled him to deliver the gospel safe from the relativities of historical research, research in which he himself was a master. But with the advent of the next decade the pendulum began to swing back and the climate of opinion was shifting. The © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 20 of 41 Bultmannian school was beginning to fall apart. First the work of Ernst Kassemann who actually stepped outside the Bultmann circle with its existentialist interpretation of the gospel, but then by Bultmann’s students Ernst Fuchs and Gerhard Ebeling who remained with the existentialist understanding but who sensed a need for a broader place to stand in concrete history, there was a return to interest in the historical Jesus, to something more than the “that” of his existence. Berkhof views this move on the part of the Neo-Bultmannians as a shift from idealism to empiricism which was similar to the shift that had occurred in the previous century. A theological generation grew up for whom the language of the great predecessors was no longer intelligible. However diverse Barth, Brunner, Bultmann, Niebuhr, and Tillich were, their basic concepts like “revelation,” “Word of God,” “absolute and infinite Being,” even the vocable “God,” all belonged to a conceptual Uberwelt which was not open to empirical verification....I see no indication that the Neo-Bultmannians consciously involved themselves in this shift toward empiricism. But since 1950 it was in the air, expanded rapidly, and manifested itself in many areas. The “shift” from “Christ” to “Jesus” belongs entirely to this new climate. For many during these years it made the gospel credible again to have it anchored in the historical Jesus. (p. 175f) Berkhof points out that this was really a return to Herrmann who also had to proclaim the gospel to a generation under the strong influence of empiricism. He never gave up the connection to empirical history. Bultmann argued with his students who moved back to the concern with the historical reality of Jesus and Berkhof comments: In my opinion, the conflict between Bultmann and his disciples has not been resolved. His disciples were stronger in their accentuation of the essential continuity between Jesus and Christ...Bultmann’s second objection against his disciple-critics is one they could not, in my judgment, invalidate: the post-Easter kerygma is not identical with the message of Jesus and does not (very often – I would prefer to say) refer back to the message and conduct of the earthly Jesus. (p. 177) As the debate came to sharp focus the questions that were clearly at issue were: Is the historical necessary to the explanation of the kerygma (Bultmann, Marxen)? And: is this minimal history sufficient for the explanation of the kerygma (Künneth)? By answering the first question in the negative one remains strictly within the existentialist framework. By answering the second question in the negative one breaks out of this framework in favor of an ontological mode of thought. (p. 178) The climate of opinion permeated with a move to the empirical opened up a return to concentration on the historical ground of faith especially in the work of a circle of young © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 21 of 41 scholars around Pannenberg. Berkhof explains this move as reflective of the way Troeltsch posed the issue. The gospel must not be positioned as far from history as possible but be understood altogether as historical power and as answer to the quest for truth in history. It seemed the path of theological development had curved back to where it was in 1910. The alternatives were still the same. (p. 178) But with our move to the Post-Bultmann School we have moved too fast, for we must backtrack and pick up the other student of Herrmann, generally acknowledged as the greatest theological thinker of the twentieth century, Karl Barth. Berkhof knew him personally and respected him deeply. While maintaining his own independence, he nevertheless himself was significantly impacted by this great man. Berkhof opens the chapter with the interesting development of Barth, biographical information so necessary to understanding him and the revolution he ignited. He cites the following statement of Barth from the preface to the second edition of his Romans: If I have a system it is limited to a recognition of what Kierkegaard called the “infinite qualitative distinction” between time and eternity, and to my regarding this as possessing negative as well as positive significance: “God is in heaven, and thou art on earth.” The relation between such a God and such a man, and the relation between such a man and such a God, is for me the theme of the Bible and the essence of philosophy. Philosophers name this krisis of human perception – the Prime Cause; the Bible beholds at the same cross-roads – the figure of Jesus Christ. (p. 194f) These are weighty sentences, Berkhof writes. He locates the respective emphases in Barth’s development. The Romans work came out of Barth’s turn to the interpretation of the Bible. With his friend Thurneysen he was disillusioned with involvement in the Social Democracy movement which failed to mobilize resistance to the war and together they were looking for a place to stand – a “crisis” brought about by the need to preach weekly. The first edition of Romans (1919) was the eruption of all that was stirring in the young Barth as he moved away from the nineteenth century with its classic liberalism, struggled with the Bible and the darkness that enveloped the continent torn apart with war. The first edition of Römerbrief was not a product of a finished theological position. Berkhof speaks of “The Detour of the First Edition of Römerbrief.” Berkhof cites Busch, Barth’s biographer: In Barth, the question of according God a place of central importance was becoming more and more fundamental. And since he had met Blumhardt, it was very closely connected with the eschatological question of the Christian hope. (Busch, Karl Barth, pp. 87, 89, cited in Berkhof, p. 186) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 22 of 41 Berkhof points out that Barth wrestled with the question of how the Kingdom of God manifested itself tangibly in a world hostile to God. In the grip of this question Barth had read Romans with the excitement of a discoverer. For him it became primarily the great witness to the absolute priority of God, visible in the work of Christ and the working of the Spirit, the Spirit who in an organic process, on the basis of Christ, transformed creation into the glory of Christ. This working of the Spirit is the inner side – perceptible to the eye of faith – of our secular exterior side. Ontology, objectivity, realism, and universalism – these are the categories which here determine Barth’s exposition of Paul. Paul helped him to proclaim the superior power of God in an alienated world and even to make it visible for those to whom this is given. (p. 186f) The publication of Romans sent shock waves through the philosophical and theological centers of the continent. Educated in the finest tradition of German culture, Barth’s move was incomprehensible to his teachers. It appeared that he had joined the side of orthodoxy. But, Berkhof contends, he was still far from the Reformation tradition and had no real appreciation for the classic teaching of justification. In the years following the publication (1919-1922), Barth continued to grope and feel his way. Berkhof, tracing the various ideas and persons that influenced Barth, concludes, I doubt that it was philosophical influence which helped Barth negotiate the great switch-in-subject which initiated in the 1916 lecture about “The Righteousness of God” and following the detour via the theology of Württenberg (The first edition of Römerbrief), provisionally found its “final” form in the second edition of Romans. According to Barth’s own sense of the matter, he owed the sudden shift in direction from the first to the second edition of Romans to an “inspiration” which at first even frightened himself.... If one nevertheless thinks here of extra theological influences, it makes more sense to look for them in the realm of the negative, in the disillusionments he suffered, especially after the war, from the liberal theology of experience on the one hand, and from social democracy on the other. These disillusionments drove him past all the relativities of human life to God – as the origin, the judge(crisis), and the hope of all that is known. In contemplation of the absolute God the merely human was condemned and redeemed to the status of relativity and so made bearable. In the first edition of Römerbrief Barth still viewed the relationship between God and the world as harmonious, organic, more or less perceptible. In the second edition of Romans discontinuity and imperceptibility predominate. God is no less present than before but his presence had fundamentally become “imperceptible,” “lightninglike.” (p. 197) Berkhof raises the question how in the space of four years Barth could read the same Pauline letter so differently. He is convinced the answer lies not in the domain of intellect but “in the depths of his Lebensgefühl (sense of life).” Educated in the Ritschlian theological school, the advancing secularization ate away at the ground on which faith rested. In Herrmann there was a thin ridge still rising above the flood; for © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 23 of 41 Troeltsch even that was gone, although he still sought the absolute in history’s relativity. For Barth, Berkhof contends, the “base” is totally gone. “History” is completely secularized and the event of the world of God is now “verticalized.” God’s work in the world has lost its final vestiges of perceptibility. The retreat has become a clean break...the second edition of Romans is also a document of that cultural epoch and the Lebensgefühl which was part of it.... A new, intensely painful experience of the godless world and, on the basis of that experience, a new quest for the God of the Bible – these two factors determined Barth’s groping progression during these years. (p. 198) Though he revered Herrmann, Barth nevertheless had to take leave of him. Bultmann had not noticed the “switch-in-subject” in the second edition of Romans and interpreted Barth in line with Herrmann. And there was structural similarity between Barth and Herrmann, as Moltmann points out: The “defenseless non-groundability of religious experience” in Barth becomes, in theologically consistent form, the “transcendental subjectivity” of the selfrevealing God, a process in which the “self” retains all the attributes, all the relations and distinctions in which it had been formulated by Herrmann. (p. 199, quoting Moltmann, Theology of Hope, p. 54) In a lecture in 1924 Barth pointed out where he separated from Herrmann. It was not a repudiation but rather a radicalization of Herrmann. Herrmann tried to ground his theology on “experience,” on “the facts we ourselves experience,” but in the section cited by Barth he continues: “But its beginning and its end is nonetheless man’s humbling of himself before the unsearchable.” Therefore, if experience lives from that which transcends experience, and if this is its beginning even, then “the unabrogable subjectivity of God” has become the starting point of our thinking, and it “becomes obligatory to ask whether dogmatics does not have to begin where Herrmann ends.” (p. 199) Surveying the whole of Barth’s theological enterprise, Berkhof holds that the relationship between Barth and his teacher must be characterized as “ambivalence” rather than a “break.” Barth’s strong stress on “the unabrogable subjectivity of God” led to differences: no point of contact in ethics; stress on the Word event; more space for salvation-historical facts, especially the cross and resurrection; a wider use of scriptural witness, including the Old Testament; and emphasis on the priority and superordination of justification over sanctification and of faith as acknowledgment over trust; also, a higher valuation of the church, its office, and its confession. But there were similarities as well: The twin pillars of his mature thought as it comes to expression in his Church Dogmatics are thus Christocentrism and, as its counterpart, the radical repudiation of natural theology. With these positions Barth was not in opposition © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 24 of 41 to the nineteenth century but to the Ritschl–Herrmann line of thought within that century. But when secularization advanced still more, Barth withdrew revelation even further from the world. It was not the “diastasis” which distinguished him from these predecessors but the degree of radicalism with which it was applied. Herrmann found final support in “the inner life of Jesus.” Barth also gives that up and then severs the connection between Geschichte and Historie. But is that a possibility if one wants to proceed on the basis of Jesus Christ, inclusive of his “historical” appearance? ( p. 200) Berkhof claims Barth could not do it even in the second edition of Romans. He quotes from Romans: In the Resurrection the new world of the Holy Spirit touches the old world of the flesh, but touches it as a tangent touches a circle, that is, without touching it. And, precisely because it does not touch it, it touches it as its frontier – as the new world. The Resurrection is therefore an occurrence in history, which took place outside the gates of Jerusalem in the year A.D. 30, inasmuch as it there “came to pass,” was discovered and recognized. But inasmuch as the occurrence was conditioned by the Resurrection, in so far, that is, as it was not the “coming to pass,” or the discovery, or the recognition, which conditioned its necessity and appearance and revelation, the Resurrection is not an event in history at all. (p. 201 from Romans, p. 30) Later, in Church Dogmatics, Berkhof writes, Barth attempted to bring Geschichte and Historie closer together but even there “failed to reach clarity on this decisive issue in modern theology.” Berkhof moves to Barth’s relationship to Schleiermacher which, in his early years, was unambiguous; he set himself over against Schleiermacher’s anthropological starting point, the grounding of religious reality in the “feeling of absolute dependence.” Despite his great admiration for Schleiermacher’s magnificent achievement, in general he found himself rejecting Schleiermacher’s theology. This rejection went so far that he closed with the question, “How can the idea [the idea that Schleiermacher has brought us to a dead end] be squared with the providence of God which rules over his church?” and with the observation: “What remains is clearly – and I do not see how it can be avoided – the possibility of a theological revolution [Barth’s italics], a fundamental NO! to the entire body of Schleiermacher’s teaching concerning religion and Christianity.” (p. 202) A bit later Barth treated Schleiermacher’s thought again, concluding that he “allowed himself to be forced into the fundamentally unworthy position of an apologist” because at bottom he was interested in Christianity “only for the sake of culture.” Yet Barth was never through with Schleiermacher. In 1968 he wrote, © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 25 of 41 I am certain of my course and of my point of view. I am, however, not so certain of them that I can confidently say that my “yes” necessarily implies a “no” to Schleiermacher’s point of view. For have I indeed understood him correctly? (p. 203) He ends, Berkhof writes, with the same ambivalence we saw above over against Herrmann. It is interesting to note here that in his revision of Christian Faith, Berkhof himself added a section on Schleiermacher’s appeal to experience. In the mid-1920’s, Barth seemed to have found his place to stand and he wrote Die Christliche Dogmatik im Entwurf. But after discovering the theological method of Anselm of Canterbury, he wrote a book on Anselm’s method and started over with his own dogmatics, this time calling it Church Dogmatics. The title Church Dogmatics brings out, for Barth, the binding force of the faith which underlies all dogmatic thought. Connected with this in Anselm’s thought is that reality precedes possibility, not vice versa. “I believe in order that I may understand” (Credo ut intelligam). The content of faith does not permit itself to be grounded by the human intellect but only to be unfolded by reflection. (p. 206) Berkhof concludes the chapter on Barth by raising the critical question which will be taken up in his next chapter, an interesting debate about Barth’s method that took place in the Netherlands. For us it is decisive to see how Barth gave up the goals of liberal theology and left its path behind him in order now to fall into line with classic theology as it was given its shape by Athanasius and Anselm, by Luther and Calvin. After the Enlightenment and after Schleiermacher, one can still do this with impunity? At no time in his life did Barth take this question lightly, but after intense struggle he nevertheless answered it in the affirmative. His students adopted his answer as self-evident and repressed the question. However, the question must make itself heard again, despite or precisely because of Barth. In the post-Barthian period Berkhof points out that question again became the central problem of theology. Barth’s influence was dominant from 1930-1960. His power of thought and consistently thought through position was cogent but not without its detractors. Brunner’s position was mediating in regard to the question of the “place” in the human person where revelation is received. Paul Tillich opposed Barth’s “Kerygmatic” theology with his own apologetic approach, a theology of correlation which finds the human question answered in God’s revelation. It was Dietrich Bonhoeffer who expressed for many the weakness of Barth’s approach. Berkhof writes of Bonhoeffer’s critique of Barth in his Letters From Prison: © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 26 of 41 Bonhoeffer is at his most genial when in these letters he treated the system which imprisoned him essentially as part of the past and concentrated totally on the rise of the new, “mature,” radically secularized “religionless” man. When the Letters were published this secularized sense of life (Lebensgefühl) was fully on the march, and people even spoke of a second Enlightenment ( Aufklårung). (p. 209) Bonhoeffer had become a disciple of Barth and they maintained a close personal bond but his prison experience moved him away from Barth’s theology. He characterized Barth’s position as a “positivism of revelation” (“take or leave it”) – a poignant criticism, and Barth was stung by it. Bonhoeffer ushered in the post-Barthian era. Berkhof observes, It arose directly from his analysis of the new cultural epoch. In the anthropocentric age in which Barth had sought his way as a theologian, his starting with God as the subject of faith and theology was a liberating new beginning. In Bonhoeffer’s time this point had already become self-evident in theology. But in the period which he foresaw, such a starting point would be completely unintelligible. For the people for whom the wording hypothesis “God” would be a total redundancy, “the authority of the Word of God” would only constitute a double enigma: first, because they would accept nothing on authority any more and, second, because they could not handle the idea of a “speaking God.” (p. 209f) Berkhof sees Barth’s starting point heavily influenced by the collapse of German cultural assumptions in the aftermath of World War I. There was a felt need for “a basic foothold in a higher, supramundane reality.” But in the post-World War II days the pendulum swung back. For different reasons, neither Barth nor Bultmann were ever able to ground the Word in history, within this-worldly existence. Technology in the after-math of the war also had a transforming effect on society. Life was understood as being shaped “from below.” Berkhof chooses the work of H.M. Kuitert of the Free University in Amsterdam as the representative of those who sought to come to terms with the new Lebensgefühl. Kuitert came under Barth’s influence through his teacher, G. C. Berkhouwer. Berkhof indicates that his understanding of Barth and subsequent departure from Barth center in Barth’s phrase “the unabrogable subjectivity of God.” Berkhof quotes Kuitert: For Barth revelation is an immediate occurrence; it is the speaking God himself….that is the figure of the transcendental subjectivity in optima forma to which Barth adhered throughout his entire life. (p. 213) Kuitert sees the line back to Herrmann and Kant here and claims that thereby Barth freed himself from any attempt to ground the knowledge of God either in history or in religious experience. But, Kuitert objects, Barth thus identified his faith concept with the subjectivity of God. Berkhof explains, © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 27 of 41 Barth claims an exceptional position for his own theological approach. He bases this on the subjectivity of faith granted us and realizing itself within us. Thus he excused himself from all discussion and from the necessity of giving an account of his thoughts. To the legitimate question: How do you know? He has no answer. (p. 213) Barth did later appeal to the biblical witness and the tradition of the church but the relationship between Scripture and the immediacy of the knowledge of God remains unclear. Barth also came to view the role of history more positively but even so God’s acts in history are alien to history itself. Kuitert insists that the alternatives cannot be avoided. Either the vocable God remains empty, or it receives an arbitrary content from within subjectivity, or it receives its content [i.e., we predicate] from within [historical] experience. (p. 214) Barth operates in a closed circle. Another Dutch theologian, Sperna Weiland, describes Barth’s theology as “a house without doors.” Berkhof explains, With its unreasoned appeal to revelation it withdraws from communication with the outside world and culture in general. (p. 214) Kuitert’s challenge to Barth’s approach engendered a lively debate within the Netherlands, young Barthians coming to the master’s defense. Our interest here, however, is in Kuitert’s alternative. In a new cultural milieu Kuitert felt the need to deal with prologomena in the traditional sense. As Berkhof points out, We must start with “man,” on an “anthropological floor” which believers and unbelievers have in common. Thus Kuitert again picks up the theme of the “apologetic” theology which Tillich opposed to the “kerygmatic” theology of Barth. (p. 220) Kuitert insisted that theology can claim to be a science only if it is willing to do more than simply bear witness, even though it cannot provide “verification” in the sense of the natural sciences. Theology must be descriptive in character: It examines religion and religions, and thus makes also God an object of its intellectual striving. (p. 220) The phenomenon of faith, Kuitert contends, can be described on three levels: anthropological, historical and institutional. On the first level, Kuitert deals with primal faith or basic trust. One trusts oneself to what one cannot as yet perceive. This basic trust has Christian-theological relevance. It does not turn theology into anthropology but humankind is bound to this “anthropological floor” in speaking about God. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 28 of 41 On the historical level Kuitert turns to the phenomenology of religion. Basic trust comes shaped in the form of a concrete religion. Berkhof points out, All religions have “God” as their point of reference. This does not mean, however, that the differences between them are immaterial. It is often certain very distinct experiences which press people to pronounce the name “God”: as an expression of meaning. Such experiences are only possible within certain frameworks of interpretation. (p. 221) Herein lies the possibility for testing plausibility. Built into faith, Kuitert insists, is an argument which makes an appeal to experience. Berkhof cites Kuitert: The grounds of faith therefore consist in that which religious people sense as the footprints of God in our world of experience. (p. 221f) When those footprints are no longer discernible, religious faith dies a slow death. Kuitert uses as an example the death of the fertility religion in the ancient Near East. When trade and industry, and finally artificial fertilizer, undermined the decisive role of the fertility of the earth, it turned out that what people took to be the footprints of God were not that at all. (p. 222) Kuitert also speaks of a religious conviction which is turned into a “search hypothesis” which guides one in the search for God. Without some such hypothesis, he claims, we perceive nothing of God in the world and whatever is perceived of God is dependent upon the search-hypothesis with which one begins. Such a hypothesis is not an end in itself; rather, the end is the personal experience of God and the experience of salvation. Kuitert’s third level is the institutional. The Christian search-hypothesis takes the form of Christian doctrine. Berkhof gives his own appraisal of the debate between Kuitert and the post-Barthians. He puts the issue in sharp focus: The question I have to answer is: For the interpretation of the gospel in today’s world, does Kuitert offer a better starting point than Barth? The weakness of Barth’s position is well known: since he starts with God, he does not seem to reach real people. Kuitert starts “from below;” can he, from this direction, arrive at the God of the gospel, the father of Jesus Christ? …The Christian faith orients itself to the footprints of God in the way and work of Jesus. His footprints can never be surpassed. How can one arrive at an assertion about them if even this faith ever has to be confirmed in history as it unfolds? (p. 226) Berkhof points out that Kuitert’s reference to the historicity of God and the claim that God is love are Christian assertions with no plausibility granted by outsiders. We are dealing with assumptions of the western Christian tradition and, Berkhof writes, we are © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 29 of 41 thus revolving within a cultural circle facing the same problem that Troeltsch faced – trying to find an absolute point within the history of religion. In contrast to Troeltsch, Kuitert is not looking for an absolute point but “for that which in history has proven itself tenable.” He is looking for certain presuppositons that will make dialogue with outsiders possible. But, Berkhof concludes, that …what emerges is that we are led, also from below, into a closed circle in a way similar to that of which Barth was accused with his starting point “from above.” It is of no help that this closed circle is presented as a concentration of experiences. For the people who have had no such experiences themselves, these experiences are transformed into authorities. (p. 227) And so, Berkhof asks, “Does Kuitert essentially understand Christian faith differently from Barth?” He takes Kuitert’s own statements that the knowledge of God is the fruit of God’s self-revelation and that a God humans can account for can never be the true God. Thus Berkhof contends, These statements, as also the theory of plural search-constructs, negate the capacity of the anthropological floor to support an accounting for the faith in dialogue with outsiders. In one’s belief one clearly has to do with a closed circle. (p. 227) Berkhof holds that Barth’s contention that only by starting with God does one come to God is confirmed by Kuitert by his own affirmation and, negatively, by the failure to ground an alternative approach. Barth’s weakness remains. Berkhof concludes, Both Barthians and post-Barthians live from the questions their counterparts do not answer. (p. 228) Berkhof concludes his journey with chapters on “Immanent Transcendentality: The Catholic Bridge,” “North America: From Social Gospel to Neo-Orthodoxy,” and “Paul Tillich: The Bridge of Correlation.” The chapters are interesting and well-done giving the survey a broad ecumenical and geographical spectrum, an important inclusion because the central question of the book comes into focus from new angles as was the case earlier in a chapter on Anglican theology and a chapter on Conservative theology which treated the work of Martin Kåhler. The treatment of Catholic theology deals most extensively with Karl Rahner as might be expected, but Berkhof also lifts up the thinking of Maurice Blondel and Henri de Lubac who made valuable contributions to the effort to bridge the gulf between gospel and culture. Berkhof notes the advantages with which Catholic theology begins over against Reformed theology, beginning as it does with the assumption of harmony between nature and grace, thanks to the synthesis worked out by Aquinas, whereas Reformed theology begins with the contrast between sin and grace. Aquinas, responding to the dominant influence of Aristotle brought to the west by Averrhoes, was carving out a place for the gospel in a world being shaped by the Aristotelian philosophy of nature. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 30 of 41 Berkhof says that one might have hoped that once again such an effort might have been made over against modern thought in the wake of the Enlightenment but, he claims, such an expectation has not been realized largely because of the suspicion with which the dominant curial theology in Rome has viewed such attempts: Fundamentally, the Roman hierarchy has continually sought, right into modern times, to rescue the validity of Thomistic thought, whereas thinkers it mistrusted wanted to make Thomas’ intent and motive operational again under changed conditions and with new, hence with non-Aristotelian, categories. (p. 229f) Having to fight their own hierarchy, Catholic theologians have been paralyzed in their struggle to engage modern thought, and the intramural battle has again and again been settled unilaterally in an authoritarian fashion. Nonetheless, Berkhof points to impressive achievements in Catholic theology. Preceding his treatment of Rahner, Berkhof summarizes the significant efforts of Blondel and de Lubac to do again what Thomas did: that is, to hold together in a greater unity the duality of nature and grace. In their work one sees the advantage of Catholic theology with its assumption of harmony between nature and grace. These thinkers recognized that in the modern world Thomas’ nature-grace continuum had resulted in a divorce of the two realms, leaving the whole development of nature to the secular sphere and thus to human autonomy. Writing at the time of Vatican II, de Lubac warned against “The dualist or, perhaps better, the separatist thesis:” While wishing to protect the supernatural from any contamination, people had in fact exiled it altogether – both from intellectual and from social life – leaving the field free to be taken over by secularism. Today that secularism, following its course, is beginning to enter the minds even of Christians. They too seek to find a harmony with all things based upon an idea of nature which might be acceptable to a deist or an atheist: everything that comes from Christ, everything that should lead to him, is pushed so far into the background as to look like disappearing for good. The last word in Christian progress and the entry into adulthood would thus appear to consist in a total secularization which would expel God not merely from the life of society, but from culture and even from personal relationships. (cited from The Mystery of the Supernatural, pp. xi-xii on p. 239f) The Catholic theologian that receives the fullest treatment by Berkhof is Karl Rahner who made the principle of transcendentality the basis of his theology, applying it across the full spectrum of dogmatics. Berkhof defines the approach thus: The principle of subjectivity has for its counterpart that of transcendentality because “this subject is fundamentally and by its very nature pure openness for absolutely everything, for being as such.” This experience is called transcendental experience because it belongs to the necessary and inalienable structures of the knowing subject itself, and because it consists precisely in the transcendence beyond any particular group of possible objects or of categories. Transcendental © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 31 of 41 experience is the experience of transcendence, in which experience the structure of the subject and therefore also the ultimate structure of every conceivable object of knowledge are present together and as identity. (Berkhof, p. 242 cites Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, p. 20) Transcendence as “experience,” Berkhof indicates, derives not from Kant’s analysis of the knowing process, but from the phenomenology and the analysis of existence. Another citation from Foundations is helpful: Whenever man in his transcendence experiences himself as questioning, as disquieted by the appearance of being, as open to something ineffable, he cannot understand himself as subject in the sense of an absolute subject, but only in the sense of one who receives being, ultimately only in the sense of grace. In this context “grace” means the freedom of the ground of being which gives being to man, a freedom which man experiences in his finiteness and contingency, and means as well what we call “grace” in a more strictly theological sense. (Rahner, Ibid, p. 34) Has Rahner, in attempting to avoid the new-scholastic dualism of nature and grace, let nature pass into the realm of supernatural grace? This is Berkhof’s question. He finds Rahner denying that. Rather, he advocates “a sort of supernaturalization of what we call ‘nature’.” For him creation and created human nature must be understood solely as the infrastructure of the grace-conditioned unity of the Creator and the created in the incarnation of God, and in the final goal of the beatific vision of God based on it. (p. 244) Rahner denies the existence of “pure nature,” and the possibility of human existence as autonomous. Rahner contends: Our actual nature is never ‘pure’ nature. It is a nature installed in a supernatural order which man can never leave, even as a sinner and unbeliever….And these ‘existentials’ of man’s concrete, ‘historical’ nature are not purely states of being beyond consciousness. They make themselves felt in the experience of man. By simple reflection on himself, in the light of natural reason, he cannot simply and clearly distinguish them from the natural spiritual activity which is the manifestation of his nature. (from “Nature and Grace” in Theological Investigations, Vol. 4, p. 183, cited on p. 245) Berkhof’s discussion of Rahner’s complex thought continues but this is perhaps enough to enable us to hear Berkhof’s critique. He points to the continuing dichotomy of nature and grace that shines through the more modern existential language, a different dichotomy than one finds in Reformation theology, the dichotomy of sin and grace. Still, Berkhof notes, the liberal and mediating theologies of post-Enlightenment © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 32 of 41 Protestantism in their engagement with modern thought struggled to express the nature-grace relationship and came very close to the manner of Thomas Aquinas as he sought to express the gospel in a thought-world dominated by Aristotle. Berkhof writes, Nature – in other words, the created structure of human existence – is for all of them the infrastructure which persists despite and in sin, an infrastructure on which the grace of revelation builds and without which it would be unintelligible. (p. 253) For Berkhof Rahner’s grand theological enterprise fails because he has subordinated the sin-and-grace dichotomy to the nature-and-grace dichotomy and the nature-and-grace relationship is, in Berkhof’s view, all too harmoniously construed. He concludes, As a result this grand theological project seems to overshoot the goal of a confrontation between the gospel and the modern world. For the (restricted) application of the notion of transcendentality we should – presumably – not go beyond the boundaries set by Blondel. (p. 255) Berkhof concludes his journey with a visit to the American scene beginning with the theology of Jonathan Edwards and Horace Bushnell, then the Social Gospel movement and the work of Walter Rauschenbusch, and finally a treatment of the Niebuhrs, thinkers for whom he has high regard. He reserves a chapter for a treatment of Paul Tillich. Tillich’s method of correlation, the gospel as the answer to the human question, is precisely the focus that Berkhof has kept through his journey of 200 years. Tillich’s life and vocation began in Germany. His war experiences destroyed the idealistic foundation of his thought. A man of great giftedness and broad interest, he was engaged with the full spectrum of cultural experience. Fleeing the Nazi plague, he came to this country to continue his long and fruitful career. Berkhof notes that, as a thinker and a Christian, Tillich had always lived and thought in the context of the polarity between question and answer. This formed the foundation of his mature theology and, consequently, he became for many “the bridge builder between their personal problems and the gospel.” His method was correlation. Tillich described it thus: The method used in the theological system and described in the methodological introduction of the first volume is called the “method of correlation,” namely, the correlation between existential questions and theological answers. “Correlation,” a word with several meanings in scientific language, is understood as “interdependence of two independent factors.” It is not understood in the logical sense of quantitative or qualitative coordination of elements without causal relation, but it is understood as a unity of the dependence and independence of two factors. (Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, American edition, p. 13, cited in Berkhof, p. 289) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 33 of 41 Berkhof raises the question whether then God in self-revelation is dependent on the human subject. He gives Tillich’s response that in God’s self-manifestation God is dependent on the way the human person receives that manifestation. As Brunner declared the divine-human encounter means something for both sides. For theology this means: Theology formulates the question implied in human existence, and theology formulates the answers implied in the divine self-manifestation under the guidance of the questions implied in human existence. (Ibid, Vol. 1, p.61, cited in Berkhof, p. 290) Berkhof discusses the method explaining Tillich’s contention that to raise the question belongs to the essence of human existence. Tillich favors the word “quest” rather than question. The quest is present whether or not it comes to expression; it is fundamentally singular and it rises out of the depths expressing one’s “ultimate concern.” Out of the human depths, the quest arises out of the human predicament, the experience of selfalienation, dread, brokenness, despair. It represents a search for integration, harmony, reunion with the true self. It is philosophy’s task to take account of all of this and to render a right analysis of human existence. Every human being, Christian or not, must be able to fathom life’s final questions and, doing so, will be confronted with the gap in human existence, a gap which cannot be bridged. One discovers a question without an answer. The description of Tillich’s thought sounds like a re-run of Heidegger’s Existentialist analysis of the human situation but, as Berkhof indicates, what distinguishes Tillich is the ontological framework of his thought – a shift also apparent in the later Heidegger. Tillich’s interest in the human quest is its theological value. He acknowledges that his analysis of the human situation derives from his historical context; the quest will differ according to the epoch. For the Church Fathers it was the quest for immortality; for the Reformation it was the quest for the justification of the sinner. Whatever the historical period and the quest, Tillich contends however that all the ultimate questions circle around the opposition between “finite” and “infinite,” “human existence” and “absolute being.” This is the quest that comes to expression in modern existentialism. The respective epochs of human history will have variously shaped quests but they will all be fundamentally oriented to the relationship between existence and essence. The answer does not lie within the question; it comes from without. The human subject is the question; God in self-manifestation is the answer, an answer not at human disposal. The two poles, question and answer, form an ellipse, the image of Tillich’s system. Philosophy, in an attitude of objectivity, is concerned with the question; theology is existentially involved in the answer. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 34 of 41 The center of Tillich’s theology is the paradox that universal being manifests itself in a historical person. The unity of the absolute and the finite, foolishness to philosophy, is the great miracle in which light we live and think. Berkhof notes that Tillich presented his doctrine of faith as “answering theology” in contrast to Barth’s “theology of proclamation.” He also spoke of his work as “apologetic” theology as against Barth’s “kerygmatic” theology – helpful contrasts by which to gain a feel for these two giants. And Berkhof points to Tillich’s popularity in the fifties and sixties in a theological world sighing under “the burden of Barth’s rigorous theology of the Word.” The alternative Tillich offers appears simple and convincing. But on closer scrutiny questions arise. Did Tillich correctly understand man’s existential quest (if we may speak of it in such general terms)? Is not giving answers as essential to human beings as asking questions? (p. 295) Berkhof doubts if human self-understanding can be captured in the word quest. Tillich struggles to give logical explanations of his correlation scheme but, Berkhof points out, he operates within a circle and intentionally so. Immediately at the outset of his prolegomena he introduced the concept of the theological circle. Like all humanities, theology is based on “mystical experience” and rests therefore on a “mystical a priori.” Besides, it works with the norm of the Christian message, and so its circle is narrower than that of the philosophy of religion. (p. 296) Tillich sought to narrow the gap between philosophy and theology, having admitted the circle, by claiming that modern philosophy bears a Christian stamp. Berkhof quotes him accordingly: In this sense [in the sense of a philosophy ‘whose existential base is historical Christianity’] all modern philosophy is Christian, even if it is humanistic, atheistic, and intentionally anti-Christian. (1:27) And again: The modern vision of reality and its philosophical analysis is different from that of pre-Christian times, whether one is or is not existentially determined by the God of Mount Zion and the Christ of Mount Golgotha. (1:27, cited in Berkhof, p. 296) The marks of the Christian tradition simply cannot be erased from the face of modern thought. Berkhof renders his conclusion regarding Tillich’s system thus: …in Tillich the answer shapes the question – as a rule by selection from given materials. Only the person who already knows the answer knows wherein the © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 35 of 41 true question consists: the question from within his anxiety, estrangement, and guilt (fundamentally Tillich’s anthropology is reformationally pessimistic) is for healing, salvation, and reconciliation and therein for the meaning of life and the courage to be. But can one view this question as a universally human question (since after all modern existentialism is a post-Christian phenomenon)? (p. 296) Tillich himself realized that the claim to universal validity could be called in question as he himself reflected on modern culture and Asiatic religions. But Tillich concluded that …nevertheless we must hold before all these groups the “mirror” of human misery, show them “the structures of anxiety, of conflict, of guilt,” because these structures mirror what we are, and if we are right, they are in other people also, and they will concur with our analysis. Whether we are successful is in question; we take the risk. In this regard Tillich turns to pedagogy: There are two principles we should follow in the religious education of our children. The first is that the questions which are really in the hearts of the children should be answered and the children should be shown that biblical symbols and the Christian message are an answer to just these questions. And secondly, we ought to seek to shape their existence in the direction of the questions which we believe are the more universal ones. This would be similar to what we do with primitive people in the mission field. We seek to answer their questions and in doing so we, at the same time, slowly transform their existence so that they come to ask the questions to which the Christian message gives the answer. (Theology of Culture, pp. 202-3, 205-6, cited on p. 297) Has Tillich offered an alternative to Kerygmatic theology? This is the question Berkhof’s interest raises. Whatever one may say, Berkhof argues, the gap between Tillich and Barth is much narrower than either suspected at the time. Referring back to Schleiermacher, Berkhof writes, As in Schleiermacher, so in Tillich, human self-understanding is not identical with the question to which revelation gives an answer; it is only the “place” (Schleiermacher) at which man finds himself and at which the gospel "calls” him. Nevertheless, like Schleiermacher and differently than Barth, Tillich avoids – as long as possible – presenting the transition to faith in the God-given answer-andquestion as a break with the presupposed human understanding of existence. God is at work everywhere, and hence there is a “latent Christianity” everywhere, which can, however, only be discovered in the light of Christ. Barth also asserts that the creation is “the external ground of the covenant” and that there are therefore many “lights of the world”; indeed, Jesus Christ, precisely in his exclusiveness, is universally inclusive. While Tillich would say that the right question is selected from the given situation in the light of the gospel, Barth would say that the gospel itself first creates in man the question appropriate to it. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 36 of 41 In Tillich the classic doctrine of “common grace” regains the place it had lost in Barth. (p. 297f) Berkhof’s critical question put to Tillich’s method is whether the answer of the gospel does not remain in the grip of a non-evangelical formulation of the question and therefore suffer distortion. Berkhof must conclude that it is impossible to view Tillich’s theology as a genuine bridge between the gospel and modernity, but this conclusion, he maintains, does not diminish the significance of this great theologian. Berkhof’s journey is concluded but he pauses to take a backward glance over the way he traveled. He begins his review with the question “What really happened?” He acknowledges that the reader may have experienced confusion; yet, one need not despair for, contrary to what many theologians – and the evangelical church tradition – generally maintain, theology is not a heavenly enterprise but a form of human scholarly quest involving trial and error. Theology is not like the natural sciences where progress is possible, one generation building on another (although Thomas Kuhn has called that in question even in the physical sciences). Rather, in theology and the humanities in general, there is not progress; rather, Here one …moves continuously in a circle around one’s object, ever and again viewing it from a different angle – and the angle changes with the experiences and predicaments of every given cultural epoch…. We are talking about a search, a questioning, an encounter, an interaction. Here neither subjectivism nor objectivism but inter-subjectivity is, in many cases, the highest obtainable measure of objectivity. (p. 299f) For theological method, this means that systematic-theological conceptions are the ways in which the Christian community gives an account of the gospel as its source and norm. The Western world out of which Berkhof speaks and in which his journey was taken is a culture estranged from the gospel and that is the challenge to the church – to bring the gospel to expression in such a fashion that it might again become a vital option. Theology serves an intermediary function interrogating the gospel from within its experiences within the culture. The theologian stands not outside, but within the culture, sharing consciously or unconsciously its experiences and presuppositions. The theologian stands between the gospel as a normative word and concrete human experience. He or she is in an encounter situation, more existential than in the other humanities because of the ultimacy of the issues involved. The best theologian is not the person who knows how to escape the dangers inherent in this process of encounter, for such people do not exist; the best theologian is the person who is most aware of these dangers and hence practices modesty and caution in what he says. (p. 300) Commenting on the modern culture, Berkhof holds that the presuppositions given with the Enlightenment have remained essentially intact: the autonomy of the human © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 37 of 41 person, the objectivizing and manipulating of nature, and the marginalizing of God. But experience has been varied: Great technical achievements, wars, revolutions, environmental exhaustion, etc., can change people’s views and conduct and force them to modify (not, however, to abandon) the presuppositions. The theologian will sense all this and in his feedback situation and mediating activity question the gospel from changing points of view. (p. 301) As Berkhof has indicated throughout the journey, this has been the case: Schleiermacher within the perspective of German idealism; Ritschl in the light of the realism of the technical-industrial world; Barth in the collapsing German culture after World War I. The situation in which theological formulation comes to expression is dynamic, calling forth different nuances and emphases at different times – not surrendering the gospel to the spirit of the times – but speaking in timely fashion the judgment and grace that the gospel offers. Theology appears chaotic and many theologians have given it a bad name by condemning the thinkers of the preceding generation for interpreting the gospel falsely. But, queries Berkhof, …was the interpretation of the previous generation really false? And did the succeeding generation then do it right? Against their better knowledge many theologians still seem to proceed from a static, unhistorical, freely available “truth” and to believe that it is most safe within their keeping….In contrast my journey has taught me that the basic concerns and aims of the several schools, modalities, and generations have much more in common than concentration on the larger and smaller differences…would ever lead one to suspect….For me as an observer the journey has been an exercise in tolerance. (p. 301) So that’s what happened. Was it legitimate? That is Berkhof’s next question. The great degree of commonality discovered among the respective theological schools does not lead Berkhof to a kind of relativistic mix without distinctions. There is room for mutual criticism and correction – a function he himself has executed with brilliance. The most fundamental question to be raised is the question with which he opened this study: Is an understanding possible between the gospel and the presuppositions of our modern culture? Modern culture’s presuppositions are described in the Old and New Testaments as sinful. Is the effort to relate these two worlds a hopeless enterprise? No. Central to both worlds is the human person and salvation. Human revolt is not a modern phenomenon; it is recorded as early as Genesis 3 and finds expression throughout the biblical story. Now the man who breaks his ties with God because he respects his salvation is there when God is not is nevertheless not abandoned by God,….God pursues this wayward human being with his judgment and grace. And judgment stands in the service of grace. Though man wants to live without God, God does not want to © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 38 of 41 live without man, and therefore man is never God-less….Whatever may have motivated the theologian not to take the godlessness of modern man with total seriousness – in the light of the gospel this attitude must at least in part be regarded as legitimate. (p. 302) The task, to be legitimate however, must involve both dialogue and dispute. The gap may not be patched over; rather it must be uncovered in order that it may be bridged. Berkhof points to Paul as a model of one who was in solidarity with his culture because of a greater solidarity with the gospel: “I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessing.” In I Corinthians 9:19-23 solidarity with Paul’s world is stressed. In I Corinthians 1:18-31 however, the break with his culture comes to expression. The message is a stumbling block and foolishness but is nonetheless proclaimed as God’s power of salvation. Paul in Athens, Berkhof contends, was right on, illustrating “the double solidarity, the mutual contradiction, and the conflict.” From this evidence one can infer that the relationship between the gospel and the world is dialectical, ever swinging back and forth between yes and no. The question concerning legitimacy can thus be answered with the observation that everyone is justified in his theological methodology provided that when he says yes or no he bears in mind the counterpart and brings it to his audience in one way or another. (p. 304) Berkhof explicates the key word dialectic by continuing with Paul. In Philippians 3:4b14, the autobiographical paragraph relating Paul’s movement from his Jewish experience to his experience of Christ, Berkhof points out a perspective not often appreciated. Paul, the Jew, was on the way. He was not pointing to that experience as a time of darkness and despair. Rather he speaks of his experience of Christ as so much more. The encounter with Christ brought him into crisis. He then moved from the crisis into Christian existence. There was continuity and break. Speaking of the theologians he has surveyed in this journey of two hundred years, Berkhof says, they were determined from the beginning to be Christian, but they wanted also to be modern people. On that basis they want to start their intellectual journey, traveling in the direction of the gospel. What unites the beginning and the end of the journey is the time of man and his salvation. In the course of that journey it has to become apparent sooner or later, however, that the road is not at all as innocuous as it seemed in the beginning. The wandered is thrown off course. He experiences the transvaluation of his values. Gain becomes loss and what he prided himself on turn to “refuse.” But the crisis does not mean the end of the road. After the crisis there awaits him a road that does not end within our world and time, one on which large differences of opinion can and do arise among travel companions, on which all sorts of lapses and aberrations are possible. (p. 305f) © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 39 of 41 That says Berkhof is the journey that has been going on now for nearly two thousand years. On the journey everyone must travel by himself. This road is itself the Truth. One does not “stand” in the Truth but “walks” in it on the way toward the goal that is not attainable this side of eternity. (p. 306) Berkhof does not want to be understood in an individualistic fashion. There is a broad community with intensive interchange. There is the swing of the pendulum as the way develops. …The Spirit finds theological reflection where it is initially at home, however “carnal” that home may be. The Spirit then leads us toward a crisis in our thinking. After the crisis our thought has to and is allowed to proceed under the guidance of the motto “I believe in order that I may understand.” However, just as our thinking before the crisis is threatened by an uncritical modernity, so after the crisis there is the danger of scholastic sterility. The gospel is the great non-selfevident factum which is ever threatened by betrayal on our theological journey. (p. 306f) Berkhof then relates the question of legitimacy to the key word “dialectical.” I now venture to say: the measure of legitimacy belonging to a given theological method or system corresponds to the measure in which it is involved in the double movement toward crisis an away from crisis. (p. 307) Over the two hundred years, Berkhof observes, we have seen liberal theologians who in their movement toward the gospel stopped short of the crisis and we have seen, too, orthodox theologians who detached the gospel from the arena of struggle, thinking mistakenly they could begin the process of thinking beyond the crisis. The greatest theologian is one who consistently “plumbed and pondered the double movement: the one toward the crisis and the one following the crisis.” Paul remains for Berkhof the model. In the last two hundred years Berkhof points to Schleiermacher and Barth. Both were one-sided on opposite sides; yet the crisis was evident in both. Berkhof raises the question whether a person can ever think on some level beyond such one-sidedness. That for him is a major question. What one gains in comprehensiveness one loses in power. A third question in this backward glance is “Did it mean anything?” Berkhof uses “mean” in the sense of succeed – was the goal achieved? His answer is in the negative. With certain exceptions “secularized culture manifested polite indifference if not outright intolerance.” Orthodox theologians have been no more successful. Being regarded as they were, outsiders, some were respected for that but considered even less credible than their liberal colleagues. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 40 of 41 But Berkhof qualifies his negative response. Outside not much impact was made, but within the churches the work done has been crucial, enabling many brought up within the church to remain within it or to return to it. They have been useful, if not for the penetration of the light of the gospel, then for the presence of the gospel in the intellectual world. (p. 309) The efforts of theologians have thus been more successful in conserving the faith than recruiting people from outside. Berkhof concludes this retrospective with a final question: “Now what?” Today, Berkhof claims, theology on a world scale appears more confusing than ever. But actually this has a positive side because there is a broad and diverse interest in theological reflection. Everywhere large groups are joyfully discovering that they themselves, each in their own uniqueness, are known and called of God. In all these new theologies the word experience serves as a point of entry…. In the 1970s one often had the feeling that in the multiplicity of experiences and the demand of “contextuality” arising from them, the oneness of the object, the universal cause of the gospel, threatened to disappear from sight and that only a tower of Babel was left. (p. 310) Such was not the case, however, Berkhof contends, for even academic theology in the West operates out of its own sitz im Leben. The real difference lies in the cultural, social, and political climate from within which people are trying to discover the gospel and to which people want to communicate it. The recent plurality of theologies can be explained by younger theologians beginning their journey from within their own experiences (blacks, women, liberation theologians, etc.). But Berkhof argues, …they must sooner or later push their own experiences toward the crisis of the gospel and walk a road on which they do not harden into an ideology but let their experiences be criticized, corrected, deepened by the crucified and risen Lord, and placed in his context. (p. 311) Does two hundred years of theology in the West, which coincides with the heyday of Western bourgeois culture, constitute an epoch on its last legs? Berkhof thinks not. The issues of struggle for this post-Enlightenment period are to be found in the biblical record as well and non-Western theologies display the same experience-revelation tension that has characterized Western theology. However, Western theology will lose its predominance; it will die in its Western-ness in order to rise again in globalism and pluralism will be more extensive. © Grand Valley State University �Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, Review by Richard A. Rhem Page 41 of 41 The process is ongoing – taking the road that leads into crisis of revelation and emerging from the crisis able to incorporate our experiences into a new experience. We must again and again start within our respective contextualities in order then to fuse our context increasingly with the context of the gospel, in a way such that the message gains superiority over all that which emerges from our situational analyses…. Everyone who spends so much time in the praeambula fidei, be it of a sociological, linguistic, philosophical, or political nature, is in danger of losing the chance to enrich his Umwelt with the great and new experience of the Word of God. (p. 312) © Grand Valley State University � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Richard A. Rhem Collection Description An account of the resource Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar. Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Religion Interfaith worship Sermons Sound Recordings Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rhem, Richard A. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaufman Interfaith Institute Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context KII-01 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1981-2014 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 text/pdf Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. References Hendrikus Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, 1989 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RA-4-19900702 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990-07-02 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Two Hundred Years of Theology, Report of a Personal Journey Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Richard A. Rhem Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Description An account of the resource Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on July 2, 1990 entitled "Two Hundred Years of Theology, Report of a Personal Journey", on the book Two Hundred Years of Theology, Report of a Personal Journey, written by Hendrikus Berkhof. Tags: Hendrikus Berkhof, Reformed Theology, History of Theology, Modernity, Ecumenical, Historical Thinking, Enlightenment, Faith Journey. Scripture references: Hendrikus Berkhof, Two Hundred Years of Theology, 1989. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Ecumenical Enlightenment Faith Journey Hendrikus Berkhof Historical Thinking History of Theology Modernity Reformed Theology