Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

Radical Orthodoxy and the Reformed Tradition: Creation, Covenant, and Participation

Rate this book
In this work, leading scholars compare the differences and points of intersection between the growing Radical Orthodoxy (RO) movement and the Reformed tradition. This timely discussion deals with many of the hot topics currently being debated in theological and philosophical circles, including the material world's participation in transcendence, aesthetics, politics, covenant, and cultural theory. It represents an emerging willingness among proponents of RO to examine and engage the Dutch Reformed tradition, and also reflects the growing influence of RO on the Reformed tradition. This book will be enjoyed by scholars concerned with the intersection between RO and the Reformed tradition. A companion book to Smith's recently published Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, it will also be of interest to students of philosophy and theology.

304 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 2005

103 people want to read

About the author

James K.A. Smith

43 books1,739 followers

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
3 (12%)
4 stars
10 (41%)
3 stars
8 (33%)
2 stars
1 (4%)
1 star
2 (8%)
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Profile Image for Jacob Aitken.
1,696 reviews424 followers
August 4, 2011
This is the second attempt by Reformed writers to interact with a movement that appears to have little to do with Reformed theology, is absent from current Reformed discussions, and whose high level of academic erudition will be lost on the average reader in the Reformed pew. Still, Radical Orthodoxy (RO) represents a left-wing, Anglo-Catholic response to modernity and secularism. RO is to be applauded for asking all the right questions, even when they give very bad answers to them.

James K. A. Smith begins the foray by summarizing RO's thought and pointing out key differences between RO and the Reformed Tradition (RT). RO holds to a platonic ontology whereby men relate to God via participation. Michael Horton will later respond that "covenant" is a better category than "participation." RO holds that Calvinism stems from modernity in that it appropriates a Scotist ontology that flattens reality (there might be more truth in this than we would comfortably admit--JA). This translates into a stale Eucharistic theology whereby Christ is absent. Laura Smit gives a good, rich response by means of articulating a truly Calvinian sacramentology. RO rightly wants to see theology take the place as champion among all disciplines. It sees a unified faith that speaks to all areas of life and rightly resists all unbiblical dualisms. Unfortunately, it ends up sounding like socialist rhetoric baptized in Christian categories.

I will focus on a few essays from the book. John Milbank, while firmly disagreeing with Reformed theology, helpfully outlines RO's vision: a vision of an alternative Protestantism. Milbank insists we need an alternative Protestantism because the 16thC Reformation, necessary as it was, was the birth-child of modernity and couldn't escape modernity's embryonic secular presuppositions. Fortunately, RO maintains a way for the church to truly be the Church, being obedient to Scripture, while avoiding the necessary secularism of modernity. I won't waste too much time in responding to Milbank save to say that Milbank's critique of capitalism (Milbank fails to distinguish between capitalism and corporationism) and defense of socialism, when not openly contradictory (e.g., Milbank wants a "decentralized socialism") is necessarily operating on secular presuppositions. Interestingly, Milbank gives a good defense on why there still might be fairies in the world. I was convinced.

Michael Horton has the best essay in the book, "Covenant and Participation." Horton appreciatively follows the RO critique of Enlightenment epistemology. He then uses Kant and the postmodernists to set the stage for a failure of all non-biblical epistemologies. Horton shows that God meets us as a stranger. He meets us in Word and in Sacrament (e.g., the Emmaus Road). Kant and the Postmodernists are absolutely correct in that we cannot reason our way to God (e.g., the death of all natural theologies), but they never considered that God would condescend to meet us by means of Revelation, Incarnation, and Sacrament. Horton's essay was a true tour de force.

Profile Image for Steve.
1,451 reviews109 followers
February 5, 2015
Here is a set of essays by Reformed folks responding to RO. I preferred James KA Smiths book length response. But this book does highlight the common ground and the great differences.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews