New Studies in Theology ed. by Stephen Sykes and Derek Holmes (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 137 both of which Mr. Martland is perhaps too quick to snub. In fact, the real clue to this book may lie in the epigraph to the penultimate chapter, " Verification," where Mr. Martland cites an oft-quoted passage from Carroll's Through the Looking Glass: " But 'glory' doesn't mean a nice knock-down argument," Alice objected . "' When I use a word,'' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less." Mr. Martland, alas, sides with the egg. ROGER KIMBALL Yale University New Haven, Oonnecticut New Studies in Theology, Vol. 1. Edited by STEPHEN SYKES and DEREK HOLMES. Duckworth, 1980. Pp. 192. Here is a book to be applauded for both its intention and its execution . It is the first in a projected annual series that seeks to develop an English language forum for the discussion of fundamental, doctrinal, and systematic theology and related disciplines. The editors state that this forum will be open both to established scholars in the field and to their junior colleagues who wish to share the conclusions of important dissertation work. There is certainly a need for such a forum. The number of publications interested in constructive, technical theological articles is not large, especially if one looks beyond the Catholic-oriented journals. No particular theme ties together the articles in this volume. Two are straightforwardly constructive pieces: Nicholas Lash on the from-above/ from-below distinction in Christology and I. U. Dalferth on the relation between the experience of Jesus as Word of God and the truthclaim that Jesus is the Word of God. Three make constructive points through discussions of other theologians. Robert Morgan discusses the connection between historical-critical studies and the doctrine of incarnation through an analysis of the unsuccessful attempt by Anglican scholars to base the latter upon the former. James Bradley argues that process metaphysics might be a truer heir than any naturalistic philosophy to the most important aspects of Feuerbach's critique of theology. Richard Roberts contends that Barth's attempt to derive the nature of reality exclusively from revelation ends up denying the reality of everyday historical succession. Three of the pieces are more exclusively historical: P. G. Wignall on the pre-World War II theological writings of D. M. MacKinnon, R. E. Williams on Vladimir Lossky's understanding of 138 BOOK REVIEWS apophasis as a key to theological anthropo~ogy, and Ann Loades on the evolution of Kant's views on theodicy. The book closes with a survey by G. M. Newlands of the literature produced in the debate surrounding The Myth of God Incarnate. The quality of the articles is consistently high. All are typified by level-headed, precise thinking of the sort one associates with English scholarship, though the prose is often rather dense. This density may be due to the apparent origin of many of the articles in recent dissertations . The articles also share the atmosphere of England. The editors and all but two of the contributors are connected with Oxford, Cambridge , or Durham Universities. Corresponding editors are listed, however , from other parts of the world; so perhaps future volumes will be more geographically diverse. A few of the articles may have wider appeal than others. The article with the broadest significance is probab,y Lash's "Up and Down in Christology." He argues that the much-used distinction between Christology from above and from below has become more confusing than helpful . The terms are used both to distinguish differing methods in Christology and to distinguish differing descriptive Christological models. While these distinctions are interrelated, they are not identical. Clarity is not furthered by referring to both distinctions with the same set of terms. Lash directly addresses the reasons Pannenberg advances for pursuing Christology from below. The above/below metaphor turns out to be used in sometimes inappropriate or misleading ways. In addition, some of the concerns that allegedly demand a Christology from below can be better met in other ways. Most importantly, Lash contends that "the beguiling simplicity of the metaphor" obscures the dependence of any coherent Christology on decisions about the nature of God and about our knowledge...