An Existentialist Theology by John Macquarrie, and: Journey Through Dread by Arland Ussher (review)

BOOK REVIEWS An Existentialist Theology. By JoHN MAcQUARRIE. New York: Macmillan, 1955. Pp. ~5~ with index. $3.75. Journey Through Dread. By ARLAND UssHER. New York: Devin-Adair, 1955. Pp. 160 with index. $3.75. Macquarrie's unusually lucid exposition of an obscure subject begins by posing as its basic problem that of the relationship of philosophy to theology. The author states that throughout history such a problem has repeatedly forced itself upon Christian theology when, in endeavoring to defend itself, it has come, for good or for evil, under the influence of secular thought. At such times, he shows, it has derived much benefit from the contact through deeper insight into itself but also much harm by being absorbed into the lower science such as occurred in the nineteenth century when Hegelian dialectics and liberal modernism simply swallowed up the Christian belief. The fear that this might happen again, the author affirms, hovers over the thought of those contemporary theologians who reject all such contact and totally expurgate philosophic content from theology. Thus Barth, for example, having been impressed with this danger through the sad experience of the last century, completely opposes a meeting of the two. He rejects any use of philosophy in the realm of faith as serving only to distort and obscure, not to clarify. In this attitude he would appear to offer a most serious objection to Bultmann's theology, which the author proposes to evaluate, but he does not think this to be so and for a deeper reason than the simple conviction that Bultmann may be trusted carefully to control the secular importation. To expose this more profound reason the author points out that, besides its apologetical use, there is another deeper function of philosophy relative to theology which is that of clarifying its ontological suppositions. In this distinct service philosophy provides, or at least helps to provide, an insight into the being of the subject of theology, thereby taking an intrinsic relation to it and avoiding the pitfalls of the extrinsic apologetical relation. The author contends that this insight, presupposed to theological inquiry, is most perfectly provided for by existentialism which alone renders a true ontological picture of the theological subject. Therein, he holds, its use in the theology of Bultmann finds its sufficient justification. The author supports his contention by showing that the proper notion of the subject necessary for theological inquiry is basically ontological, giving its true significance as being. He posits that only existentialism can 517 518 BOOK REVIEWS discover this significance and from this position concludes that it must be the "right" philosophy for use in such a pre-theological endeavor. Of course, this is a most difficult position to criticize adequately within the limits of a review, since it involves the vast and fundamental problem of the nature of the subject in the affirmations of faith as well as in the derived propositions of theology. Leaving aside such a basic question, then, as practically unmanageable, let us restrict our criticism to the relatively simpler one as to whether or not existentialism provides what the author claims that it must and does as a prelude to theology, that is to say, a true ontological statement of the nature of man. From the dramatically clear though mute testimony of Heidegger's incomplete "Sein und Zeit," whose doctrine forms the basis of Bultmann's position, it seems obvious that it does no such thing. For although Heidegger intended in that work to provide a general description of beingness as such, taking his point of departure in a phenomenological analysis of the concrete situation of man, he was never able to go beyond the initial step, as the unfinished state of the work testifies, and therefore never able to arise to that general description of beingness itself which he conceived to be necessary to a true ontological understanding even of man. Starting from subjectivity, from which he excluded all universality and all categories, he was unable, as was only to be expected, to rise to a universal position. Whatever else he might have done, then, he has not supplied the required ontological insight for theology, and by that fact his ontological...