Catholicity Involves History and a Globe

When I first read Reformed Catholicity (hereafter RC), it labelled something of which I felt a part, but had no idea formally existed in the Reformed world, not unlike a toddler who suddenly comes to realize that they have a middle name. It unveiled intentional efforts my professors, from various (mostly Protestant) institutions, had made in drawing their students toward texts of Early Christianity. So, while I expect most of the contributors to this issue will start from the vantage point of educators, my original gratitude comes from reflection of my time as a student.

As a historical theologian (I think that is what I am), the description of thirteen movements was very helpful. It unpacked nuances between conversations that, I had assumed were parallel streams coming from the same fount (such as the ressourcement movement leading to, what RC calls “nouvelle théologie” and “Ressourcement Thomism”). In particular, the description of “Theological Interpretation of Scripture” (TIS) highlighted my own ignorance, for careful historical work is being done in what I had incorrectly categorized as a purely exegetical movement. What the ressourcement did for Roman Catholics around the time of Vatican II, with its emphasis on Scripture and the Fathers, TIS was doing for Protestants, emphasizing historical and theological implications of exegesis. I have long encouraged students of Biblical Studies toward TIS as an exegetical method, and was thrilled to see ways it has already been drawing from the streams of the history of interpretation. Rather than view the discipline of history as able to converse with a particular exegetical method, this book has enabled me to explore, with students, how the history of interpretation can be part of the TIS method.

On the other hand, when considering retrieval and proof-texting (chapters 1 and 5 respectively), while I agree with the substance of the argument, I question the result. Among historians, the biggest gripe against retrieval is similar to biblicists regarding proof-texting. Too often, the context is ignored to validate the assumptions the reader brought to the text. Allen and Swain respond to those critiques convincingly with regard to Scripture in Chapter 5. They show that in good theological work, even if it is not always explicitly explained, careful exegetical work has historically been behind the proof-text. This requires that careful exegesis continue to be important for theologians in years to come. Similarly, good work of retrieval demands that careful historical work be done. However, in Roman Catholic circles, I have heard more than one scholar bemoan that while von Balthasar or de Lubac knew the Patristic period, for example, and it informed their theology, their students rarely draw from the Early church, save through the filter of von Balthasar or de Lubac. Without demanding that all theologians be specialists in biblical studies and historical theology, the continuity of habits and principles outlined by Swain and Allen will only continue if students of theology continue to be well-versed in disciplines that the modern guild has separated. RC returns to the expectations the Church used to have of its pastors, but for this movement to continue, it needs professors to be more conversant in the often-siloed disciplines of Bible, theology, and history.

Lastly, a throw-away line in Billings’ afterword deserves comment. He states that, “catholic-Reformed theologians should be in appreciative and critical dialogue with other movements as well…” a list which includes “the theologies of the global South” (160). This seems to suggest that it was not happening at the time it was published, but I believe it had actually existed for quite some time. For example, in the paragraph prior, Billings mentions African theologies of retrieval, noting, among others, Oden’s work. However, in How Africa Shaped Christianity Oden argues that the confessional tradition of theology started, among other places, in Africa, so the work of retrieval with African theology, is in many ways, a return to its own roots, not to something foreign. By reading Augustine, for example, one is reading African theology, and one can describe the work of retrieval as returning, among other things, to African theology. This is not to discount modern African theology, but rather to highlight that Christianity has depended on African theologians throughout the centuries. Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Augustine, and others contributed to and walked in the stream of tradition from which the work of retrieval is being done, and noting this work dispels any notions that the work of global theology has not always been a part of the tradition of the Church, or should be an addendum to the work of retrieval. The work of recognizing theology from history is the same kind of habit in the work of recognizing theology from the wider geographical panorama of the global church. For example, further afield, but closer to my own neck of the woods, Prof. Theo Donner, who was a student of Henry Chadwick at Cambridge, has been teaching at a Protestant seminary in Colombia, South America since 1983. Hundreds of Spanish-speaking students have passed through his classes, and many more have read his books, an effort that has, for years, engaged in the kind of work that this book describes as retrieval, but for a global context. Today, this can also be seen in younger Reformed scholars, like Dr. Daniel Eguiluz from Peru, who considers ecclesiology through the lens of Calvin’s reception of Cyprian of Carthage. These are only two of many examples, but like any engagement with theologies of the Global South, there are often huge efforts already being made of which the academy in North America and Europe is not cognizant. Not unlike the toddler learning their own middle name, I hope that the RC movement will increasingly notice work already being done by excellent global scholars that is amplifying its influence. Though these scholars may teach in different languages, they are already hoeing parallel furrows in this same garden, and walking over to learn from their progress may be a helpful next step in better understanding the influence of this movement.