Customer Reviews

Systematic Theology (Volume 3)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I cannot even begin to hope to interact in detail with this magisterial work. One of the blurbs on the book jacket acclaims this work as significant as the 20th century works by Tillich, Barth and Rahner. It's true. If one wants more detail than I can provide in this review, I recommend the review by Christoph Schwobel in Modern Theologians or the respective secondary works by LeRon Shults or Stanely Grenz. Volume I (ISBN 0802836569) covers prolegomena, God and Trinity. Volume II (ISBN 0802837077) covers creation, christology, anthropology and some soteriology. Volume III (ISBN 0802837085) covers the rest of soteriology, pneumatology, ecclesiology and eschatology. First, very briefly, this work is not light reading. It is a theologian's theology, unmatched in its scientific approach. Although one may beg to differ on the details of his treatment, he has a breathtaking command of scripture, historical theology and the Continental philosophical tradition. The figures that populate these pages are Calvin, Barth, Ebeling, Wilckens, von Rad, Althaus, Krestschmar, Moltmann, Schlink, Origen, Aquinas, Scotus, Rahner, Augustine, Schleiermacher, Kant, Hegel, Dilthey, Melancthon, and of course Luther. Second, more than any other contemporary theologian, P. has taken seriously the categories of history, anticipation, promise and hope without sacrificing a high standard for the pursuit of truth in the academic conversation. His basic reason for this is that the truth of the gospel claims the church so that she can witness to the world. However, truth is only grasped provisionally on this side of the eschaton, because only at the eschatological consummation is the full totality summed up and revealed (Dilthey). This entails an openness to public debate, not a retreat to argument by assertion or authority. In some ways, I would say that P. has recovered the original sense of auctoritas, which is the power to _persuade_. (Of course, it would take me too far afield to discuss why conservative Christians have emphasized authority in response to modernity). The critiques of P. have been the obverse of what his acclaim. First, the difficulty of the work has drawn the criticism that he is pastor-unfriendly, and that he has scholasticized the original excitement of 20th century theology. I can certainly sympathize with this; hence, I would recommend P's former student, Stanley Grenz (_Theology for the Community of God_). Be that as it may, the reception-history of many scholastic theologies have often been unfriendly at first, until people realize they need a rigorous treatment to solve theological problems they can't solve by themselves (e.g. Aquinas). Second, American reception of P. has been guarded, because of his unfriendliness toward liberation theology. Yet, as has been pointed out, this is because of his own experiences with Marxism from his roots in East Germany. However, to find out how he cashes out his theology into ethics, one has to look other parts of the P. corpus. Third, does his theology of history make God subject to his creation and evacuate divine simplicity? More specifically, is his own view of "divine infinity" as the sum of the transcendent attributes adequate to maintain the Creator-creature distinction? Fourth, how sucessful is his ecumenical ecclesiology in attempting to synthesize various positions normally seen as incompatible? E.g. his view of Eucharist as anticipation, anamenesis, epiclesis & trans-signification tries to sublate Anabaptist, Reformed and Catholic positions into a broadly Lutheran position. Fifth, his epistemology emphasizes the "not yet" of truth in tension with the "now." Hence, the noetic path to the ontic reality of Christ is the work of Christ in his death and resurrection (note the mating of historicist concerns with Melancthon's "we know Christ through his benefits"). Hence, his Christology proceeds "from below" by starting with the Christ-event to his person. This is the obverse of Karl Barth's Christology! It would take me too far afield to discuss his Christology, but this "apologetic" move raises the question of whether his dialogue with the world is prior or posterior to his own dogmatic decisions. All in all, I cannot recommend this ST highly enough. It is certainly stimulating reading, and will help theologians give an account for the reason for their hope.

Pannenberg is a deep thinker and this book will surely generate debate. However, if I bring things down to the basics, Pannenberg fails in developing any meaningful Systematic Theology of the Christian faith because he abandons the rule of faith: He abandons the revelation of Scripture.

For Pannenberg, history is revelation. Man becomes the measure of God's actions, and not visa versa. He brings God low and understandable and elevates man to the ultimate point of focus, understanding, and judge of how the heavenly Host is relating to His world. This is absurd on many levels. He rejects the hallmarks of the Christian faith and builds again upon what? Upon the history of God's dealings with man, as man has perceived them (or as Pannenberg has perceived them) and therefore we can sit in judgment upon them/Him.

Such a weak, ineffectual God (and theology) I want no part of. I fear his other volumes fair no better.

JJ