Theology within the Bounds of Language: A Methodological Tour

1. The Terrain Ahead

Chapter 1 ‫ﱾﱻ‬ The Terrain Ahead A tour through the streets and scenes of London: such is the Preface’s image, suggesting and suggested by this book’s title, Theology within the Bounds of Language: A Methodological Tour. What, now, more precisely, is the London in question, the terrain to be reconnoitered? Though the terms theology, language, and methodological provide a general indication of the ground to be covered, the area they collectively encompass is still too vast. Each of these three expressions requires further delimitation. First, language interests theology in various ways, many of fundamental importance; yet not all of them lie within the primary focus of the present work. Here, emphasis will fall on basic questions concerning the use of language rather than its interpretation, on successful discourse rather than on accurate exegesis. This emphasis does not signify exclusion , for the first type of question connects importantly with the second. Deeper understanding of the appropriate use of language brings with it more discerning awareness of how language is in fact employed in discussions or documents we may wish to decipher. Still, in what follows, attention will center primarily on the former sort of question rather than the latter—on linguistic practice rather than linguistic interpretation. Theology, too—ancient and modern, Eastern and Western, popular and professional—takes in more than this work will attempt to explore. Although most of what is said will apply more broadly, attention will center primarily on Christian theology, from which illustrations and applications will typically be drawn. Though restricted, this focus is nonetheless ample. A recent observer has noted, retrospectively, the “many-faceted richness and vitality of twentieth-century Christian theology,” which “has been overwhelming to the point of bewilderment.”1 There has been Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox theology; European, African, Asian, North American, and Latin American; liberal and conservative; 1 2 Theology within the Bounds of Language biblical, dogmatic, kerygmatic, systematic, pastoral, social, and spiritual; confessional and ecumenical; black, feminist, philosophical, ecological, and so forth, with endless variations. Yet common to all these versions and varieties of Christian theology, as to other kinds, has been the use of language. Whether thinking, speaking, or writing, theologians employ a system of signs. And whatever the topics they discuss, they usually wish their statements, using those signs, to have intelligible meaning and to be true. Common, therefore, to the theological enterprise are methodological issues of linguistic practice such as those here addressed. Though much has been written on these questions, they are usually slighted in works of fundamental theology or theological method, and, as already noted, no study has gathered them together in a handy compendium. Such is the aim of the present guide. Methodology, the category to which this work belongs, captivates few readers. The very word methodology has a dry, abstract sound to it. Yet in theology as in philosophy, science, history, and other areas of inquiry, questions of method hold fundamental significance. And in theology more than in most other disciplines, methodological issues with regard to language are among the most fundamental. Or at least some are, and on those this study will focus. Interest will not center on topics such as rhetoric considers, with regard to style, effective argumentation , or the art of persuasion, but on others of a kind whose nature can be suggested, in advance of the many examples to come, by means of a remark of John Macquarrie. “Theology,” he has written, “may be defined as the study which, through participation in and reflection upon a religious faith, seeks to express the content of this faith in the clearest and most coherent language available.”2 Here the closing words, “the clearest and most coherent language available,” suggest stylistic virtues. “Clarity, clarity, clarity!” insist primers on style. Break up involved, complicated sentences! Make sure relative pronouns have clear referents! Avoid ambiguity! Have mercy on your readers! The present study will not take this tack; it is not a treatise on style. Instead, attention will focus, for example, on issues of the kind raised by Macquarrie’s opening five words, “Theology may be defined as.” The proposed activity, defining, is linguistic; that much is clear. But here in this quotation as often in theological discussion, the nature and purpose of the activity are less evident. Does the proffered definition aim to capture the existing meaning of the English word theology? Does it propose, instead, to fashion a substitute meaning of the term? Or, more interested in theology than in the word...