Naming the Whirlwind: The Renewal of God-Language,

by Langdon Gilkey

Hardcover with dust jacket. Previous owner's name stamped inside front cover. Wear on upper edge of text. Dust jacket in mylar worn at ends of spine. Otherwise VG

Genres: Theology

483 pages, Hardcover

Published January 1, 1969

Reviews

[Jeremy Garber · Rating 4 out of 5]

Langdon Gilkey, renowned liberal theologian of the mid-twentieth century, provides a challenge both to secularist thought and to radical theology that remains pertinent almost fifty years later. Gilkey presents a “prolegomenon” to theology which argues that secular theory does not provide adequate resources to deal with the phenomenology of ultimacy in everday experience. While some parts of Gilkey’s book have aged poorly, and a few of his major points don’t quite hold up, Naming the Whirldwind’s argument still holds true. It also exemplifies well-written, solidly researched theology that is accessible and readable to the ordinary person.

Gilkey’s book is divided into two parts, “The Challenge to God-Language” and “The Renewal of God-Language.” The first part deals with the rise of “radical theology” in the sixties, which took Nietzsche’s aphorism “God is dead” very seriously, and sought to deal theologically with that concept as a result. This theology rose within the secular worldview, summarized by Gilkey as having four main characteristics: contingency, relativism, temporality, and autonomy. He goes on to critique liberal Protestantism, whose faith in progress and autonomy was shaken by the World Wars of the twentieth century, and neo-orthodoxy, whose attempt to save a separate sphere for the Word failed to connect it to secular experience. Both of these led to the Death of God movement, which attempted to save Jesus without a reference to God – a theological effort that Gilkey shows is both intellectually and pragmatically impossible.

If “God is dead” isn’t the answer, what is? The second part of the book looks at secular experience and how only a concept of ultimacy beyond the immediate can solve our phenomenological anxiety. Gilkey describes our everyday experience of ultimacy as our realization that our origins and powers are given to us beyond our own control, which we experience as helplessness, and when we see that we are free but constrained by the systems and powers around us. Nonetheless, we also find joy and meaning in working in our lives toward the greater good of the community and posterity. None of these aims can be dealt with positively except by an outside force that creates and provides us unconditional love and the power to change and be forgiven.

The most painful part of Gilkey’s book is his comments on the essentially different natures of men and women, an almost stereotypical caricature of male vibrancy and female nurturing. This can all safely be rejected without discarding the main argument of the book (and replacing all the “man” with “human” in your brain). Secondly, although Gilkey is attempting a neutral bracketing of the evidence as a phenomenological method, his assumptions about the way religion and ultimacy work are coincidentally awfully Protestant Christian. To his credit, he’s aware of this, and talks a good bit about our locatedness and the impossibility of neutral inquiry. But he’s most successful when he’s unapologetically theological, as some of the loveliest passages of the book come from this mode. Despite these flaws, Gilkey’s analysis of the secular mood in theology and its shortcoming is just as if not more relevant today than it was when he published it in the turbulent era of 1970. Recommended for professional theologians and seminary students who need to talk thoughtfully to a secular world – which is all of us.

[Kevin Megill · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a terrific book responding to the God is Dead theology and its logical positivist related challenge that religious language is meaningless. It first argues that that position is contradictory. Later it argues for a way to think about the meaning of religious language that makes sense even from a completely secular perspective. Finally, it talks about how we can do theology in a way that connects to the parallel secular meanings. Definitely worth a re-read at some point.

[Theresa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this up because it was referred to in something I read and I liked the title. I wanted to clarify some of my thoughts on the usefulness or not of God talk to the experience of human contingency.

The book arose out of the ferment of the 1960's when relevance of religion was a big deal. I paid particular attention to the last chapter, "Christian Discourse about God". It is a great find. Very elucidating on the topic of how we know what we know, how to sort out what we know, and whether it all means anything, in the end.

[pjr8888 · Rating 4 out of 5]

St Patrick's Seminary