|
|
196 - Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic |
Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic
WITH the final two volumes on the doctrine of God, Carl Henry completes his magisterial work, God, Revelation, and Authority, confirming his reputation as today's premier evangelical theologian. (Carl F. H. Henry, God, Revelation, and Authority, Volumes V and VI; Waco, Texas: Word, 1982, 1983. 443 pp., 566 pp. $19.95 each). Showing encyclopedic knowledge of both philosophical and theological partisans in modern disputes, the author ranges over such subjects as the divine attributes, the Trinity, election, Providence, feminist language proposals, theodicy, post-, pre-, and a-millennialism, and the creationist-evolutionist controversy, relating the discussion always to the issues of religious epistemology dealt with in the four earlier volumes. In the end, the ground covered in these 1,000 pages, with that traversed in the preceding 2,000, constitutes an evangelical dogmatics, although one not developed according to traditional loci.
I
Henry launches his metaphysical inquiry in these works by asserting the supernatural reality and objectivity of God against a tradition of dialectical and existentialist theology whose roots are traced to Kant and Kierkegaard, current manifestations he believes are the subjectivizing tendencies of Barth, Brunner, and Aulèn, as well as Tillich and Bultmann. Thus the author returns to the emphasis in earlier volumes oh Scripture's univocal propositional knowledge as juxtaposed to the non-cognitive personal encounters attributed to neo-orthodox theology, or to the ambiguities of the analogical language as defended in the tradition that runs from Aquinas to Mascall. The future-oriented theologies of Moltmann and Pannenberg also come under criticism for casting doubt on the present reality of deity and the lack of adherence to scriptural testimony about the incarnation. Continuing his earlier studies in personalism and idealism, Henry reviews and rejects the thought of Lotze, Brightman, Knudson, and Bertocci on the relation of divine substance to activity, arguing that rational disclosure in Scripture, rather then "conjectural philosophy," assures us of God's self-identity.
Throughout Volumes V and VI, process theology comes under sharp
Gabriel Fackre is Professor of Theology at the Andover Newton Theological School, Newton Centre, Massachusetts. He is the author of The Christian Story (1978, revised and enlarged, 1984) and The Religious Right and Christian Faith (1982). His article on "Ministries of Identity and Vitality" appeared in THEOLOGY TODAY, Oct. 1979.
|
|
197 - Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic |
attack. Henry's long sections here, together with Royce Gruenler's new work, The Inexhaustible God, constitute a major evangelical critique of this school of thought. Henry's objections include: the aseity and prior actuality of God arc denied by the assumption of the dependence on, and inseparability of God from the world; the perfection of God is denied by the concept of divine growth; the once-and-for-allness of the Incarnation is swept away by the structure of a philosophy of becoming, and explicitly so in the Christological exposition of current process theologians; no significant place is found for the divine righteousness or wrath, given the exclusive emphasis on the divine love; the divine impassability is overturned by the stress upon the suffering of God; the personal nature of God is put in question by various process philosophers; the classical doctrine of the Trinity is incompatible with process thought; an adoptionist Christology and exemplarist soteriology are native to process theology; the classical "omni's" are not merely reinterpreted but called into question. These doctrinal errors are all finally traced to a reliance on philosophical conceptuality rather than biblical revelation.
Throughout these volumes other evangelicals are called to account on one or another point of doctrine (Donald Bloesch, James Daane, Dale Moody, G. C. Berkouwer, Jack Rogers) with inadequacies related by Henry to the slippery slope of either non-inerrantist biblical authority or ambiguity about the cognitive weight of theological assertions. Catholic thought of the Rahnerian and Teilhardian variety is questioned on the grounds of departure from scriptural norms.
Not only is there debate here within the theological arena but also extended philosophical inquiry and scientific investigation. In the former case, sections of the book constitute almost a refresher course in Greek philosophy from Anaximander to the Neoplatonists, as well as an overview of modern metaphysical inquiry from Heidegger to Whitehead. In scientific matters, we are led into highly technical discussions of big-bang, big-bubble, and steady-state theories of the origin of the universe, and arguments pro and con with Jastrow, Jaki, Gould, Hoyle, etc.
Henry's alternative to the positions rejected, on the specifics of the doctrine of God, reads like a traditional Reformed dogmatics (L. Berkhof's, for example), except that the cast of characters changes and the critical engagement with alternatives is more intensive and extensive. Volume V deals in the main with the metaphysical attributes of simplicity, eternity, infinity, immutability, omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence, the doctrine of the Trinity (tripersonality and unipersonality), the relation of being to attributes (attributes express the essence), and a note on the feminist challenge to the language of patriarchy (with a traditionalist response modified by the recognition of some inclusive imagery in the Bible and a call for non-dominant male-female relationships).
Volume VI begins with a strong defense of the supernatural vis à vis the weaker notion of transcendence, and goes on to defend both divine
|
|
198 - Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic |
foreknowledge and foreordination while holding to human accountability. One hundred and twenty pages of the book are devoted to the creationist controversy. Here Henry seeks to set forth a mediating position in the current dispute among evangelicals on this subject. The "how" as well as the "who, what, and why" of the creation stories are revelatory but have to do with the significance and order rather than the literal meaning of the "days"-a "progressive creation" view to be distinguished from naturalist evolution and theist evolution, on the one hand, and "fiat creation," on the other. Angelology, Satanology, and theodicy are taken up after this. The holiness of God and the love of God are discussed with a critique made of views that ignore holiness or deny its parity with love. The holiness theme is further developed in terms of the justice and wrath of God. The final sixty pages of the last volume deal with "the God who stays," the doctrines of providence and eschatology.
With both volumes, there are long side trips out from the main road of ontology into discussions of the political responsibility of Christians, the issue of cultural relativism, holocaust studies, the relation of Christ to other world religions (stressing the scandal of particularity but including a defense of general revelation), and a frequent return to the issues of biblical authority treated in earlier volumes.
II
This overview of the great variety of topics covered prompts an initial observation on format and style. These volumes-the entire series as well as the two under consideration-are spiralic in presentation. Henry moves methodically through the subjects announced but returns time and again to issues and answers earlier set forth, examining them again in new contexts. At best, this is illuminating, especially so of the initial subject seen now from a fresh angle. At worst, the reiteration is tiresome and in need of much more editorial scrutiny. Related to this is a characteristic of Henry's writing not unlike that found in the Christological tomes of Schillebeeckx. A gentle critic of the latter once remarked that he not only writes theology but writes it down-everything that comes to mind. So, too, Henry piles topic upon topic without sufficient rationale for their inclusion under a given rubric. Benefits do indeed come from this. Each new volume in this series is topical, as Henry treats challenges that have come up during the intervening period, giving those of evangelical persuasion a guidebook through current disputes. On the other hand, the logical development of the subjects and argument suffer from the range of questions addressed and the pull of topicality.
What of the substance of this massive enterprise? The study of these volumes and earlier ones undertaken by the reviewer in classes and discussion groups of clergy and faculty colleagues, whose participants in the main do not agree with Henry's views on inerrancy, brings a near universal testimony of appreciation. This has to do in part with encyclopedic knowledge of the author. More than that, Henry has taken
|
|
199 - Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic |
the trouble to read and engage those with whom he is in disagreement. In this readiness to go through the discipline of careful research and engagement, he demonstrates a liberality of spirit touted by establishment theologies but often denied in practice by the same, when it comes to attention to evangelical views-a fact which contributes in turn to the fortress mentality of some among the latter constituency.
So, those who care about the state of theology today can thank Carl Henry for his persistence and probing in the areas which go unattended by many theological trendsetters and notables. One of these areas is his clear-headed defense of the propositional element in faith and doctrine. Another is his attention to the canons of logic and his call for accountability to them. Yet another is his struggle to be faithful, in his own way, to the biblical norm, and thus to honor the distinctives of classical Christian faith.
III
Yet counter-questions must be put to Henry, and by people who share historic evangelical commitments, questions let us say posed by "evangelical catholicity" to "evangelical orthodoxy."
(1)Is the church given its due in theological method and authority? It plays a more significant covert role in Henry's system than is explicitly acknowledged. Without at least the instrumental function of the Christian community in the canonization and transmission of Scripture, and in the sedimentation of the many classical themes on the doctrine of God to which reference is made (from Trinity to aseity), there would be no Bible or propositional distinctives to defend. Recognition of this even in minimalist terms- church/tradition as "ministerial" and Scripture as "magisterial"-alters the argument on authority at significant points. For one, it makes a place for the development of doctrine rather than construing biblical affirmations in term of timeless doctrinal propositions, since the Spirit working in the church can enrich the meaning of faith, albeit along the trajectory of biblical intention. For another, it puts in question the dilemma posed by inerrantists: either inerrancy or a "pick and choose" approach to the Bible with the imperial reader in charge of God's Word.
(2)A place for classical tradition and the church's role is related to help that can be gained from the church's reflection and conclusions on other doctrines, as these are related to questions of authority and revelation. Thus the debates in soteriology and Christology can illuminate epistemology. For example, isn't the claim for the univocity of theological propositions like the perfectionist view of sanctification? Just as "having and not having," the already-not-yet tension in the Christian life is displaced by claims that we have arrived in this world at eschatological perfection, so too the assertion of univocal propositions about God goes beyond the proper eschatological reserve in matters of
|
|
200 - Carl Henry's Reasoned Apologetic |
knowledge (I Cor. 13:12). Indeed, Henry acknowledges from time to time that the language of faith and theology is exceeded by the divine reality and mystery, but he rejects the concept of analogical language that is designed to make just that point: adequacy to the Reality within the conditions of finitude, (for example, God is at least personal in the sense we are), but one that honors ranges of mystery beyond our experience (God is eminently more personal than we are, and in a dimension not penetrable by the likes of you and me). Related to Henry's criticism of analogical language is his proper concern about the way religious symbol theory is developed by some who empty it of objective referent and cognitive claim. Yet to both propositionalism and imaginationism we can say with Bunyan, "must I needs want solidness because by metaphors I speak? Were not God's Gospel-laws in olden times held forth by types, shadows, and metaphors?"
(3) Is the "domino theory" in matters of authority a legitimate argument? Does the soteric inerrancy view of Bloesch, Rogers, or even the "witness to revelation" hermeneutic of the so-called neo-orthodox, begin a process of erosion whose end point is "secular humanism"? A position that honors reason and evidence as much as that of Carl Henry has to produce more rational and empirical warrants for this assertion than are customarily put forward. Further, a secular theory of this sort drawn from the world of politics should not be allowed to exercise undue influence on the work of Christian theology, especially the kind for which Scripture is normative.
(4) Is there a logical flaw in the argument that anything short of inerrancy means an "errant God"? (An "errant Bible" implies a God in kind.) Making an unnoticed entrance here in both the rhetoric and logic of this argument is the assumption that we have in hand the inerrant Book. However, for Henry, errorlessness applies to the autographs only. So, the Bible in hand, flawed in transmission (albeit only slightly) is technically "errant." Yet the God who comes with truth to us right now through this flawed text is not thereby believed by Henry to be errant. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
IV
Criticism aside, God, Revelation, and Authority is a work of the first magnitude. Here is the most thorough exposition of evangelical orthodoxy in our time. As befits this tradition, questions are raised about theological adventurism that must be faced by all who affirm biblical authority and classical faith. And again, when today's necessary recovery of imagination, affect, symbol, and story presses toward yet another pendulum swing, we can thank Carl Henry for speaking a good word for the life of the mind.