Elaine Graham on Public Theology

Elaine Graham, Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Public Theology in a Post-Secular Age (London: SCM, 2013), xxvii + 266pp.

I am grateful to Third Way for providing a review copy of this book. A version of the below review (painfully limited to 900 words) was first published in the January 2014 issue of the magazine.

Public theology, according to Elaine Graham in this rich and full treatment, ‘draws its agenda from matters of public concern beyond the Church and, similarly, seeks to communicate its deliberations back into wider society’. Christians engaged in public theology thus find themselves between the ‘rock’ of faithfulness to inherited traditions and the ‘hard place’ of openness to a diverse and critical public domain.

But the ‘rock’ and ‘hard place’ of the book’s title also have to do with the post-secular age in which public theology now takes place. Conventional secularization theories hold that as societies modernize they become less ‘religious’ – in levels of affiliation and belief, in the strength of religious organizations, in the political and cultural prominence of religion in society. Yet, for all that, religion remains a potent force, interest in personal spirituality is strong, and global migration has fostered religious diversity. Graham is careful to note that this does not represent a reversal of secularization, still less a religious revival, since secularist discourse remains vibrant. Instead, we are witnessing ‘an unprecedented convergence of two supposedly incompatible trends: secularization and a new visibility of religion in politics and public affairs’ – what Jürgen Habermas, Charles Taylor and other leading social theorists are referring to as the emergence of a ‘post-secular’ society.

So, the first part of Graham’s book helpfully teases out the complexity of the post-secular moment, where Christian engagement in public life has to navigate between the ‘rock’ of religious resurgence on the one hand and the ‘hard place’ of secularism on the other.

Part Two then essentially explores options for how Christians might respond to the changing presence of the role of religion in public life. In classic liberalism, the public theologian ‘translates’ – using publicly intelligible criteria – the Christian faith for those who are not believers. Public theology is ‘bilingual’ in that it draws from its own tradition while listening to and being understood by others. The risk here is when the attempt to find common ground involves dismantling the integrity of Christian witness.

As Graham notes, one response has been to root public theology in the specifics of ecclesiastical practice, where the church serves the world best not by providing a religious footnote to secular concerns but by living out its own calling. Broadly representative here is the post-liberalism of George Lindbeck and Stanley Hauerwas along with the Radical Orthodoxy movement associated with John Milbank, Graham Ward, Catherine Pickstock, Phillip Blond, and others in broad sympathy with such perspectives, including Luke Bretherton. The fear here, though, is that the church places itself above criticism and loses its footholds in the public realm. While appreciating the emphasis on practice and the everyday faithfulness of the church, Graham thinks the projects of bilingualism, mediation and apologetics of the liberal model are not so easily dismissed.

Nor does Graham hold out much hope for the ‘micro public sphere’ of conservative religion. Here she outlines the actions of a small number of Christians in the UK who have brought high-profile legal cases against their employers, claiming to have experienced persecution for expressing their faith in a work context. Those who advocate this ‘evangelical identity politics’, as Graham describes it, depict themselves as a beleaguered remnant under attack from the dark forces of an aggressive secularism, and seem more interested in defending lost privilege than social justice or the common good. Gratifyingly, Graham recognises that evangelical political behaviour operates across a broad spectrum, and that many evangelicals are world-affirming, seeing cultural engagement as an opportunity rather than a threat.

The final part of the book turns to more constructive proposals, as Graham seeks to recover a view of public theology as Christian apologetics. She takes her cue here from Max Stackhouse, but rightly points to a rich tradition of those who from early days offered a defence of the church’s relationship to public life, right back to the New Testament itself. This is not apologetics of the ‘propositional-evidence-that-demands-a-verdict-closely-followed-by-a-prayer-of-commitment’ sort. Rather, it involves dialogue and persuasion – and imagination – seeking to make a plausible case in terms that can be grasped by others.

In particular, it will be an ‘apologetics of presence’, concerned with seeking the welfare of the city (akin to the call to the Judean exiles in Jeremiah 29:7), ‘contributing critically and constructively (in word and action) to a flourishing public square’. There are resonances here with two recent works that don’t appear in the book: Miroslav Volf’s A Public Faith (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011), and James Davison Hunter’s, To Change the World (Oxford: OUP, 2010), the latter advocating a ‘faithful presence’ in society.

Lest we consider ‘presence’ too acquiescent, Graham is clear on the Christian calling to speak truth to power in continuity with early apologists, and the challenge not just of belief but of justice – not just to convince the non-believer but to liberate the non-person. The church, then, is not merely a passive presence, but the ‘sign and sacrament of God’s redemptive presence in the world’. As Graham suggests, this is likely to happen most effectively not only where churches equip their people to give an account of themselves in society, but which support the everyday witness of the laity in their secular vocations, where the grassroots practices of discipleship spill over into active citizenship.

Martin B. Copenhaver, Anthony B. Robinson, and William H. Willimon on Good News in Exile

Martin B. Copenhaver, Anthony B. Robinson, William H. Willimon, Good News in Exile: Three Pastors Offer a Hopeful Vision for the Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), xi + 116pp, ISBN 9780802846044.

[This is a lightly edited version of a review which was written in October 1999, and first published on London School of Theology’s website.]

A relatively slim volume, but with challenge and insight on every page, this book could have an effect out of all proportion to its size. Reading it raises the intriguing question of where it should be shelved. Pastoral theology? Preaching? Doctrine of the church? It embraces all of these and more. Christians should read it, and pastors should discuss it.

The title of the book arises from the recognition that North American churches today are without privilege, in an environment which is indifferent or hostile, and so find themselves in a situation akin to an ‘exile’. But, as the authors remind us, God has considerable experience in working powerfully among those in exile. ‘As the history of Israel demonstrates, a time of exile can be particularly rich and fertile. There is opportunity in relinquishment.’

Although the book’s three writers represent different backgrounds, all admit to having been nursed in the arms of ‘liberalism’ and to being subsequently influenced by the theological proposals of George Lindbeck and Stanley Hauerwas, which call for a move beyond liberalism into a new ‘postliberal’ situation. Liberalism assumed a basic continuity between the best of human thought and the Christian message, with the church as the centre of civic life, where the gospel was adjusted to the perceived needs of people. In postliberalism, however, the church is to be a counter culture. Instead of the gospel being adjusted to the needs of people, people are challenged to be transformed in the light of the gospel. Instead of speaking the language of culture, we speak the peculiar language of the church into the culture.

The book helpfully begins with each of the three writers writing an autobiographical preface, tracing these changes in their own lives and the life of the church; and the volume breaks some new ground in seeking to relate postliberal theology to different facets of the life of the church. So, the autobiographical reflections are followed by a series of chapters dealing successively with Scripture, preaching, sacraments, Christian formation, and social action.

Scripture, according to the authors, is ‘our home in exile’, which reshapes experience. Its authority has to do ‘not only from how the words got on the page, but also from how the words get off the page’. Scripture is to be acted out in the life of the congregation: we immerse ourselves in the biblical story and the world it creates, and when we do so, we find it makes sense of our lives. Sermons should be based on lectionary texts so that both preacher and congregation can hear what God says through Scripture, rather than what the preacher thinks congregations need to hear.

In liberalism, the preacher begins with some aspect of the human condition (we feel empty, we lack self-esteem), and then moves to Scripture to find a relevant text to address the contemporary concern. Against this, following George Lindbeck, they advocate a ‘cultural-linguistic’ approach.

‘To become a Christian is to enter a “culture,” a complex system of rituals, words, signs, symbols, habits, and practices that make us who we are… You cannot get Christianity by having the Christian faith translated into some other philosophical framework like liberalism, or existentialism, or Marxism, or the language of self-esteem. Rather, to be a Christian is to be someone who has learned the language, someone for whom the “grammar” of the Christian faith has become part of your life.’

On sacraments, they remind us that rituals sustain in situations of exile. Sacraments are particularising, and emphasise difference and separation. Sacraments place us in a vulnerable position, where we surrender to, and receive from, an ‘Other’. They are also acts of imagination, which defy the rational and allow space for us to rediscover the power of symbol and story.

On ‘Christian formation and the teaching ministry’, they argue that pastors pastor by teaching and teach by pastoring. Ministers must not be institutional managers or helping professionals, but community-based teachers of the faith. Theology is necessary for the life of the believer, and the teaching ministry of the church ‘has less to do with information than with formation’. In Christian formation, as in sports, crafts, and the arts, ‘there is a set of skills, a language, a history or tradition, a master teacher or teachers, and a community of those committed to the practice’.

When it comes to ‘mission and social action’, whereas liberalism sought to transform the world through political action, they argue that ‘the primary political role of the church is to be the church’. We gather in worship to get the gospel straight, to speak our native tongue, to make sure we do not forget the unique dimensions of our story. Encounter with God in worship may lead to conventional political activities, but not because of some ‘universal impulse’ to do the right thing. In fact, beginning with the gospel may redraw ethical debate.

For instance, on the nuclear weapons debate, both sides (whether to arm or not to arm) agree that the fundamental issue is our survival. But Christians follow one for whom survival was not the issue. Similarly with abortion, those who advocate a ‘right to choose’ and those who advocate a ‘right to life’ at least agree on the notion of ‘rights’. But the language of rights is not the language of Scripture – which speaks not of rights but of duties, which reminds us that life is a gift, which speaks of relationship with, and responsibilities towards, others. It may well be that the church best serves the world not by entering into debates on the world’s terms, but by recasting debates in ways that reflect the distinctiveness of the gospel.

They conclude with an emphasis on conversion. Although exile is a time of loss, it may also be a prelude to reconstruction and recreation. Our task is to point people to the new world of the gospel and to embody that world in our lives.

All in all, there is much on which to reflect, much by which to be challenged, and much in which to take encouragement. There ought to disagreement too. Those outside the North American context will want to ask how far the authors’ description of the church is accurate in their own situations. Although there is much here for evangelicals to agree with, they will have to realise that the authors are not advocating a return to the ‘conservative’ fold, and that there are things in the postliberal agenda to be critical of, even if it provides substantially more resources for life and ministry than other alternatives. For all of us who own the label ‘Christian’, the book sets an agenda which shouldn’t be ignored, as we seek to allow the gospel itself to set the agenda in discipleship and church life.

As the authors write: ‘In exile Israel had dared to name its national disaster as a time of judgment on its past fidelity and as a time of promise for a new God-given future. Might this be a similar time for my church?’