Any science, any scientific discipline needs and uses a method. A method is a tool used to obtain effectively theoretical and practical results. One needs to test his/her method, whether it guarantees coherence and consistency with one knowledge and thoughts. Theology like any other human activities uses a method. Before Vatican II, theological method was taken for granted since scholastic theology had provided all the answers. Today, theology needs an effective and appropriate method in responding to the many social, political, economical, intellectual, cultural changes that have occurred in our contemporary world. Doing theology today means primarily formulate an adequate theological method that brings life and faith into mutual conversation, gives the Scriptures their place within the theological endeavor, and builds theology as contextual praxis. Thus, among the theological methods that Mueller presents, the empirical method of David Tracy would be preferred by a postmodern African that I am and living in a pluralistic world. The lines that follow will expose the reasons that motivated our preference.
Due to its prolific results and to diverse interpretations from different scholars, Tracy’s theological methodology has received many labels. Considering its American empirical backgrounds and its emphasis on experience, Mueller calls it empirical method. Tracy does not stop at the experience; rather he is concerned about the relationship between the common human experience and the Christian classics – Christian tradition or core of Christian heritage. This relationship can be called a retrieval (“revisionist” theology), a critical correlation (“correlational theology”, an approach that originated from Paul Tillich), or a “conversation”. For Tracy, theological reflection aims to establish the meaningfulness of the experience hic et nunc. Human experience is where God revealed his mystery to humanity, and faith is part of that experience. Unlike Rahner, Tracy acknowledges that human experience is a source of theology and the goal of theological reflection. In order to be understood, human experience is communicated and expressed through a specific language made of symbols, images, conventions, texts, stories, and etc. thus, within human experience faith has to be interpreted and understood through a specific language born in the Christian community from the mutual and critical conversation between experience and language and Christian tradition, especially the Scriptures. For Tracy, theology is ongoing interpretation; therefore his method is explicitly hermeneutical. This may be the first advantage of this method.
Secondly, Tracy methodology is clearly contextual. He is proposing a methodology of doing theology in a pluralistic context. Tracy experiences pluralism within the Christian classic, the church, theology, culture, and the whole world. Pluralism is really a postmodern concern; and no one can do theology in this postmodern era without taking into account the experience of the other as “other”. Pluralism is a Christian and charismatic phenomenon. The Christian classic contains diverse witnesses to Christ in the Scriptures and the theologies of the early Fathers. Pluralism is also the experience of the church in the diversity of its members as it is moving towards an intercontinental religion; and in the diversity of theological schools that have elaborated. Finally the whole world is made of different religions and cultures that are part of our experience. This pluralistic dimension is important for it is intrinsically human. It is the setting for creativity of interpretation in the search for religious truth. It can be used today in evangelization as ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation. Whether with other Christian denominations, with non-Christian religions, or in its encounter with cultures, the Church has to go into dialogue in mutual respect.
Thirdly, Tracy conceives theological method as a dialogue, a conversation. Unlike theology of liberation, this method is reaction against a situation for a period of time, but a genuine attitude of theological enterprise within a pluralistic framework. In a pluralistic context, conversation is the relationship between the different partners. It is the conversation between Christian and non-Christian sources, between common human experience –my life experience, culture, data from human sciences- and language and retrieved Christian Tradition. As pluralism is not relativism, conversation is not compromise. This conversation is a mutual critical and self-critical correlation. In this mutuality, no one owns the conversation; the tension is toward the meaningfulness of my religious experience and the search for religious truth. Partners in conversation have to be open, ready to be challenged and transformed by the truth discovered. They are not bound to agree on every issue, they can discuss or resist; but at the end, truth has to be freely followed. Ambiguity will be discovered, errors will be criticized and corrected, and distortions will be unmasked. Referring to his contact with Buddhism –and what should be, in our opinion, the result of any efforts in ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation-, Tracy says that this conversation culminates into a genuine “liberating transformation”.
Fourthly, Tracy's method is against religious particularism and exclusivism. There is no definitive theology. Theology is an ongoing interpretation, a radically hermeneutical project. Therefore, the Christian classic, especially the Scriptures, as well as human experience, through human experience and imagination, should go through interpretation; interpretation itself being a critical conversation. Unlike Lonergan, Tracy stresses that experience and understanding are intrinsically hermeneutical because radically linguistic –language here includes silence, verbal, analogical and figurative languages. Interpretation and hermeneutics are key process in Tracy’s project. In ministry, interpretation is more than translation; it is the search for meaningfulness from the inner meaning of experience and Christian Tradition.
Fifthly, Tracy builds his method on a strong foundation, what he calls “Christian classics”. These classics have five characteristics: (1) they are excellent for they have meaning in themselves, alive, but still they can speak to us hic et nunc, and therefore they have to be interpreted, retrieved, and not manipulated; (2) they are universalizable for they hold higher human values that are universal; (3) they have a shock value for they challenge and call for a transcendental vision; (4) they are source of hope for they call for transformation, change toward a better situation; finally (5) they are fecund for they generate active commitment and creativity for further interpretation. For Tracy any culture or any religion has its own classics. Classics avoid subjectivity and relativism in dealing with the other. And it is at the level of classics that interpretation and mutual and critical conversation takes place.
Finally Tracy’s method is a praxis that ends into practical theology, especially developed by the Whiteheads. Interpretation is a critique, a “hermeneutics of suspicion” that should attack interpretations used to justify racism, sexism, elitism, individualism, anti-Semitism, and other injustices, as Lennan points out (Introduction to Catholic Theology). Theology is committed to changes and transformations within the church and the world, by addressing issues of liberation, women, , etc. therefore theology is a praxis, for issues raised by practical theology are addressed by other theological branches in order to inspire new and further actions. The whiteheads have produced a threefold model of reflection that is a conversation between life experience, culture – both called experience by Tracy- and Christian tradition; and a three-stage method made of attending, assertion and active response. This see-judge-act like method is a conversation in each stage of the three components of the model.
In conclusion, Tracy formulates a method that appears the most appropriate for our time and the mission of evangelization. Whether through ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation, the new evangelization has to be a serious, mutual, respectful and critical conversation oriented toward change and promotion of human welfare.
Due to its prolific results and to diverse interpretations from different scholars, Tracy’s theological methodology has received many labels. Considering its American empirical backgrounds and its emphasis on experience, Mueller calls it empirical method. Tracy does not stop at the experience; rather he is concerned about the relationship between the common human experience and the Christian classics – Christian tradition or core of Christian heritage. This relationship can be called a retrieval (“revisionist” theology), a critical correlation (“correlational theology”, an approach that originated from Paul Tillich), or a “conversation”. For Tracy, theological reflection aims to establish the meaningfulness of the experience hic et nunc. Human experience is where God revealed his mystery to humanity, and faith is part of that experience. Unlike Rahner, Tracy acknowledges that human experience is a source of theology and the goal of theological reflection. In order to be understood, human experience is communicated and expressed through a specific language made of symbols, images, conventions, texts, stories, and etc. thus, within human experience faith has to be interpreted and understood through a specific language born in the Christian community from the mutual and critical conversation between experience and language and Christian tradition, especially the Scriptures. For Tracy, theology is ongoing interpretation; therefore his method is explicitly hermeneutical. This may be the first advantage of this method.
Secondly, Tracy methodology is clearly contextual. He is proposing a methodology of doing theology in a pluralistic context. Tracy experiences pluralism within the Christian classic, the church, theology, culture, and the whole world. Pluralism is really a postmodern concern; and no one can do theology in this postmodern era without taking into account the experience of the other as “other”. Pluralism is a Christian and charismatic phenomenon. The Christian classic contains diverse witnesses to Christ in the Scriptures and the theologies of the early Fathers. Pluralism is also the experience of the church in the diversity of its members as it is moving towards an intercontinental religion; and in the diversity of theological schools that have elaborated. Finally the whole world is made of different religions and cultures that are part of our experience. This pluralistic dimension is important for it is intrinsically human. It is the setting for creativity of interpretation in the search for religious truth. It can be used today in evangelization as ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation. Whether with other Christian denominations, with non-Christian religions, or in its encounter with cultures, the Church has to go into dialogue in mutual respect.
Thirdly, Tracy conceives theological method as a dialogue, a conversation. Unlike theology of liberation, this method is reaction against a situation for a period of time, but a genuine attitude of theological enterprise within a pluralistic framework. In a pluralistic context, conversation is the relationship between the different partners. It is the conversation between Christian and non-Christian sources, between common human experience –my life experience, culture, data from human sciences- and language and retrieved Christian Tradition. As pluralism is not relativism, conversation is not compromise. This conversation is a mutual critical and self-critical correlation. In this mutuality, no one owns the conversation; the tension is toward the meaningfulness of my religious experience and the search for religious truth. Partners in conversation have to be open, ready to be challenged and transformed by the truth discovered. They are not bound to agree on every issue, they can discuss or resist; but at the end, truth has to be freely followed. Ambiguity will be discovered, errors will be criticized and corrected, and distortions will be unmasked. Referring to his contact with Buddhism –and what should be, in our opinion, the result of any efforts in ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation-, Tracy says that this conversation culminates into a genuine “liberating transformation”.
Fourthly, Tracy's method is against religious particularism and exclusivism. There is no definitive theology. Theology is an ongoing interpretation, a radically hermeneutical project. Therefore, the Christian classic, especially the Scriptures, as well as human experience, through human experience and imagination, should go through interpretation; interpretation itself being a critical conversation. Unlike Lonergan, Tracy stresses that experience and understanding are intrinsically hermeneutical because radically linguistic –language here includes silence, verbal, analogical and figurative languages. Interpretation and hermeneutics are key process in Tracy’s project. In ministry, interpretation is more than translation; it is the search for meaningfulness from the inner meaning of experience and Christian Tradition.
Fifthly, Tracy builds his method on a strong foundation, what he calls “Christian classics”. These classics have five characteristics: (1) they are excellent for they have meaning in themselves, alive, but still they can speak to us hic et nunc, and therefore they have to be interpreted, retrieved, and not manipulated; (2) they are universalizable for they hold higher human values that are universal; (3) they have a shock value for they challenge and call for a transcendental vision; (4) they are source of hope for they call for transformation, change toward a better situation; finally (5) they are fecund for they generate active commitment and creativity for further interpretation. For Tracy any culture or any religion has its own classics. Classics avoid subjectivity and relativism in dealing with the other. And it is at the level of classics that interpretation and mutual and critical conversation takes place.
Finally Tracy’s method is a praxis that ends into practical theology, especially developed by the Whiteheads. Interpretation is a critique, a “hermeneutics of suspicion” that should attack interpretations used to justify racism, sexism, elitism, individualism, anti-Semitism, and other injustices, as Lennan points out (Introduction to Catholic Theology). Theology is committed to changes and transformations within the church and the world, by addressing issues of liberation, women, , etc. therefore theology is a praxis, for issues raised by practical theology are addressed by other theological branches in order to inspire new and further actions. The whiteheads have produced a threefold model of reflection that is a conversation between life experience, culture – both called experience by Tracy- and Christian tradition; and a three-stage method made of attending, assertion and active response. This see-judge-act like method is a conversation in each stage of the three components of the model.
In conclusion, Tracy formulates a method that appears the most appropriate for our time and the mission of evangelization. Whether through ecumenism, interreligious dialogue or inculturation, the new evangelization has to be a serious, mutual, respectful and critical conversation oriented toward change and promotion of human welfare.
Sources:
- Mueller, J.J., SJ. What Are They Saying About Theological Method? (Ramsey. Paulist Press, 1984)
- Lennan, Richard. ed. An Introduction to Catholic Theology. (Mahwah, NJ. Paulist Press, 1998).
- Whitehead, James & Whitehead, Evelyn. Method in Ministry: Theological Reflection and Christian Ministry. Revised edition.(Lanham: Sheed&Ward, 1995)
No comments:
Post a Comment