Types of Christian Theology

by Hans W. Frei, George Hunsinger (Editor), William C. Placher (Editor)

Hans W. Frei (1922-88) was one of the most important American theologians of his generation. This book makes available the work in which he was engaged during the last decade of his life. Based on his 1983 Shaffer Lectures at Yale University and his 1987 Cadbury Lectures at the University of Birmingham, it presents Frei's reflections on issues and options in contemporaryrepresented theology, especially on the relation of theology to biblical interpretation and on the place of theology as an academic tradition. In the book Frei proposes classifying theologians according to whether they see Christian theology primarily as an academic discipline or as an internal activity of Christian communities. He describes fie different variations of these views. the first, represented by Immanuel Kant and Gordon represented, regards theology as a philosophical discipline within the academy. The second, represented by theologians as diverse as represented represented, David Tracy, and Carl Henry, correlates specifically Christian with general cultural structures of meaning. The third type, represetned by represented represented and Paul represented, occupies the middle of the spectrum. The fourth type, represetned by Karl Barth, emphasizes the internal descriptive task of theology but remains open to ad hoc correlations with concerns of the wider culture. the fifth, which includes D. Z. Phillips and other Wittgensteinian fideists, opts for pure self-description though this group defends its position with philosophical arguments that, oddly enough connect it with the other end of the spectrum. Frei argues in favor of the third and fourth options. In his view, theologians like Schleiermacher and, even more, Barth, although often seen as polar opposites, enable theology to remain most faithful to the priority of the ecumenically attested literal sense in biblical interpretation.

Genres: Theology, Nonfiction

192 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1992

Reviews

[Solomon Trimble · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent. One of the best books about theology (as opposed to 'books of theology') I've yet read. Sadly, the unfinished nature of the work is very apparent, as this really is a collection of essays and lectures compiled by William Placher and George Hunsinger for the book which Frei did not write, owing to his untimely death. On that front, it has a vaguely eclectic feel. Nonetheless, what is there is excellent. The actual five 'types of theology' are extremely helpful, although unfortunately the example theologians for each type Frei gives have not persevered very well in contemporary theological discourse, so it makes them a little difficult to map on to the present. I will try to summarise the five types from the outside inwards for clarity (1,5,2,4,3), although do note that Frei does them consecutively.

Type 1 is broadly that of a predominantly philosophical theology, or even theology as a kind of philosophy; Frei gives the example of Gordon Kaufmann, but also mentions Kant and Fichte. Type 5, dubbed 'Wittgensteinan Fideism,' is a kind of Christianity as an exclusively socio-cultural linguistic phenomenon, independent of a search for absolute truth, and Frei throws out the name D.Z. Philips. Though these views are in some ways furthest apart, as Frei notes they are also in some ways the most similar, as examples of theology in which the actual Christian story has become marginal to meaning.

Type 2 is similar to Type 1 in that theology is a philosophical discipline, however "the specificity of Christian religion is taken very seriously, in a way in which external description and self-description merge into one, and the joint product is justified by a foundational philosophical scheme." (p.30) Frei offers us David Tracy, Rudolf Bultmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Karl Rahner, and also the evangelical Carl Henry as examples here. There is a sense that this is a Christian Theology which is deeply engaged in philosophical apologetic, and making the Christian worldview coherent to outside observers in thoroughly philosophical ways. The insight here is that this can be in strangely progressive ways (Bultmann) but also stridently conservative manners too (Carl Henry).

Type 4 (Frei's preferred option) presents theology as a kind of Christian self-description which is not philosophically founded, and therefore appears distinct within and without the Church. His example for this is Karl Barth, however he points to Cardinal Newman and Jonathan Edwards as examples from history. It is important to note that this is all bound up with Frei's reading of Barth, which is different from that of others (like McCormack), seeing Barth as the beginning of the non-foundational, post-liberal theological movement.

Type 3 is the most difficult of all, and is reserved for Schleiermacher, a problematic choice, because, as Frei notes, many scholars read Schleiermacher as Type 2. Nevertheless, what's distinctive here is the idea that theology is a second-order discourse on a first-order experience which is fundamentally impossible to express. He gives a nice read of Schleiermacher here, and by placing Type 3 between 2 and 4, helps the reader locates his idiosyncrasies and the tensions he is trying to balance between theology as Christian self description and a kind of philosophical discipline.

Beyond the types, the appendices have some great pieces, including one on 'Jesus and the German academy' and a reflection on Eberhard Busch's biography of Barth, which is really just another opportunity for Frei to give his own post-liberal reading of Barth. It is there where he drops the famous and oft quoted line, "had he not been a theologian, he would have been more widely recognised as one of the towering minds of the twentieth century." (p.148)

[Kendall Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's Frei. So, as expected, it's as insightful as it is dense.

[Mark Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Truly sad to think of what this could have been had Frei lived to complete it. Still relevant and fresh nevertheless.

[Eve Lumerto · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was quite difficult getting through this.