Billings on the theological hermeneutic

I recently had the chance to review Todd Billings’ new book, The Word of God for the People of God: An Entryway to the Theological Interpretation of Scripture. Quite impressive stuff, and if you’re looking for a good introduction to the discussion, Billings might be the place to start. Due to my own theological background, I found Billings’ argument very sensitive to evangelical and Reformed concerns. In a relatively brief treatment, he was able to namedrop Protestant figures like Jonathan Edwards, Kevin Vanhoozer, John Webster, Herman Bavinck, Jamie Smith, Richard Muller, Daniel Treier, N.T. Wright — and of course John Calvin.

Billings covers a lot of ground along the way, delving into topics as diverse as the exegetical quadriga, “indigenized” creeds, natural law, and the Protestant preference for lectio continua. I’m also very encouraged to see more Reformed reflection on canon formation and the place of sola Scriptura in the postmodern (and post-evangelical?) context. Along with Vanhoozer’s massive burnt-orange contribution, Billings is well-positioned to bring an ecumenical sensibility to confessional Reformed-evangelical theology (his next book seems to continue this trajectory).

Summer reading 2010

• Todd Billings, The Word of God for the People of God
  Billings’ previous work really impressed me, particularly for the way it approached the Reformed tradition respectfully (Protestant ressourcement?), but not as if it were cryogenically frozen. So far, this new book has been excellent. More introductory and less original, but one of the best treatments of theological interpretation I’ve found.
• Roland Boer, Political Grace: The Revolutionary Theology of John Calvin
  I wanted to enjoy this one more than I did. Plenty of interesting nuggets, and I’m all for making Calvin and Marx blood brothers. But the overall narrative (and its inability to reckon with Calvin’s Augustinianism) left me unsatisfied.
• Paul Harding, Tinkers
  Very excited for this one. Harding studied under Marilynne Robinson at Iowa. And he likes Barth. Even without the Pulitzer, that’s enough for me.
• Bruce Ward, Redeeming the Enlightenment
  Coming to this one with less background information. Wondering if the anti-Enlightenment narrative hegemony is finished.
• Gerald McKenny, The Analogy of Grace: Karl Barth’s Moral Theology
  This one will likely have to wait until the Hesburgh gets a copy, thanks to the OUP price tag.

Competing humanisms in Reformed theology

Horton’s critique of Tanner (or at least her earlier work) is particularly fascinating as it reveals certain underlying differences between a dominant strand of Reformed thought and the alternative vision of Protestant theology offered by Tanner herself. I think there may be more here than meets the eye. Horton recognizes that Tanner’s Christology carries implications for a Reformed doctrine of human nature. Perhaps most foundationally, Horton suggests that Tanner’s emphasis on the ascension of humanity requires a de-emphasis on the descent of God and the human work of Christ. But why this assumption and concern?

While Horton carefully articulates the way in which God’s presence is “over, for, and within the world,” he offers another affirmation which appears to qualify this view: “God is involved in every facet, and yet he also gives to creation its own relative independence and freedom…. The fruitfulness of creation is not always the result of God’s direct action in the world.” Horton subsequently emphasizes that “God was not interested in creating a world without its own inherent, generative capacities – its own space.” Here we find a significant difference in language from the theological grammar employed by Tanner. While Horton’s notion of the “relative independence” is somewhat vague, it complements his emphasis on divine descent over human ascent. Just as the human work of Jesus must be marked out as distinct (this seems relevant to Horton’s emphasis on the doctrine of the active obedience of Christ), so Horton also wishes to maintain some sense of distinct “space” for creation – apparently with some generative potential apart from any directive grace. While God is “present” everywhere in some way, there almost seems to be a desire for humanity to have at least some extensively natural, human ends; an emphasis on the (already and not-yet) ascent through Christ would threaten that “independence.” Horton understandably wants to affirm that “Jesus is therefore not only God turned toward God, but humanity turned toward God.” With this, Tanner (and Barth) would wholeheartedly agree. At the same time, however, Horton alleges that an emphasis on divine transcendence, as found in Barth and Tanner, will be unable to account for the other side – the truly human (Paul Dafydd Jones complicates the accusation in his recent work, The Humanity of Christ). However, while such neglect may be entirely possible, this is also a somewhat ironic accusation, considering that Horton’s own emphasis is on the necessity for the distinct and “relatively independent” function of the human apart from any direct unity with the divine. On this point, it rather seems that Tanner (leaving Barth aside) is the one whose paradigm relies most strenuously on understanding Jesus’ divinity and humanity “in the closest possible relationship of unity,” such that the humanity of Christ is the “very condition” of the existence of the incarnate Word. The human ascent of Jesus to the Father is precisely the grounds for Tanner’s view of the rest of humanity’s transformation. It is odd that on this point Horton seems to imply that descent and ascent are mutually contrastive; the overall structure of his theological project need not rely on such a dichotomy. Yet, perhaps this brief relapse into oppositional language reveals a lacuna within some strands of contemporary Reformed thought: an absence of ascent and the telos of the human.

Tanner, Horton, and Reformed theology

The trajectory of Kathryn Tanner’s theological plotline in Christ the Key intersects at an intriguing point with some current Reformed discussions of the doctrine of creation and humanity. To those outside the tradition, Calvinistcan appear eager to talk about divine revelation, but perhaps less so about the theology of nature or creation. It’s been somewhat problematic for the Reformed and more broadly Protestant community to articulate the means by which God breaks through our finitude and the sinful barriers we naturally defend against the goodness of the divine offer.

Interestingly, a recurring approach to the dilemma of transcendence has been to emphasize the condescension of God over and against both 20^th century correlational theologies as well as Barthian thought. In Lord and Servant (a really worthwhile prologue to the forthcoming systematic theology), Michael Horton argues for a delineated “covenantal” approach to transcendence and immanence. Horton wishes to avoid the dual temptations of Tillichian hyper-immanence (an ontological model of “overcoming estrangement” with God) and postmodern hyper-transcendence (in which God is a “stranger we never meet”). Hyper-transcendence introduces an unbridgeable dualism between Creator and creature, while hyper-immanence reverts to a Hegelian form “according to which we come to ourselves when we come to God.” In Horton’s covenantal model, however, God’s condescension to our human frailty is a central theme; humanity relates to God in a way akin to “meeting a stranger.” On this account, he contrasts the “ontological model” of reconcilement with his own “covenantal-ethical” approach. While guarding against double-sided temptations, Horton helpfully articulates a way to maintain both divine transcendence and immanence, and to recognize that God, “who is in no way a part of the world or dependent on the world nevertheless created and inhabits it, filling every nook and cranny with his presence.”

This account is particularly intriguing for the ways in which it approaches aspects of Tanner’s own theological project. However, despite the initial similarities, Horton directly objects to some of Tanner’s earlier Christological proposals as “verging on an implicit Apollinarianism/Monophysitism.” The grounds for this charge lie in what Horton perceives as Tanner’s argument that “the Word’s assumption of [Jesus’] humanity is the immediate source of his whole human life.” While he later qualifies his allegation to some extent, Horton makes a fairly common Reformed objection to any perceived primacy for the divine nature in Jesus’ human work when he pointedly asks, “And what about [Jesus’] own faithful humanity as a true covenant partner? Is it just God’s faithfulness acting in and through the humanity?” For Horton’s covenantal model to function properly, humanity must be affirmed as human, “and not as deified or elevated humanity.” While acknowledging the need to avoid the opposite temptation toward Nestorianism, Horton critically rejects “Tanner’s emphasis on the incarnation as the elevation of humanity rather than on the condescension of God.”

Items of note (5/7/10)

Apologies for the lack of posts over the past couple weeks. Finals are now put to bed, thank goodness. But I’m sure it will be a mere matter of days before I miss spending regular time studying under the stellar faculty I had this past semester: Cyril O’Regan, Jennifer Herdt, John Meier, and Mark Noll.

While I’m decompressing with family in Chicago, just a few links of note:

• Is there value in using the New Testament as historical apologetic? Jesus Creed on Wright vs. Hays.
• David Frum gets Jonah Goldberg to admit Obama is not a socialist.
• Brett McCracken’s follow-up on ecumenism, doctrine, and the Wheaton conference vs. Together For the Gospel.
• An entertaining comment thread: Calvinists articulate the authority of the church vis-a-vis Rome (hint: Vatican II debates might come in handy for us).
• Brad Littlejohn review-in-progress of David VanDrunen’s book on Reformed theology and natural law.