Historical Theology an Introduction by Bromiley Geoffrey William Review

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Church history is dead, long live historical theology!

Peter Houston

Department of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology, Faculty of Theology, Stellenbosch Academy, Stellenbosch, South Africa

Correspondence

---

Abstruse

Church history is dead, long live historical theology! This restatement of the monarchical police force of le mort saisit le vif is at once a argument of irreparable aperture and assumed continuity. The erstwhile monarch is no more, nevertheless a new and different monarch ascends to fill the aforementioned vacant throne. This is the paradox of church history becoming historical theology. Reviewing the work of W.A Dreyer and J. Pillay on the re-imagining of church history every bit historical theology, this article explores the tension between the demise of church building history every bit a subject in South Africa and the emerging understanding and application of historical theology, arguing that more than can be made of trans-disciplinary dialogues.

Keywords: church building history; environmental theology; historical theology; S African universities; theological disciplines; transdisciplinary.

---

Introduction

Church history is expressionless. At least this is the case in Southward African universities. Church history has come up to be perceived every bit an irrelevant and marginalised bailiwick. There are several notable reasons for this. Firstly, church building historians were regarded with suspicion because of a lack of critical engagement during apartheid (Dreyer 2017).

Many preferred to listen to the voices which gave theological, philosophical and theoretical justification to ethnic nationalism (Dreyer 2017). Secondly, church history became almost completely cut off from social sciences and from secular history resulting in a weakening of its academic status within the academy academy (Denis 1997).

The field of study was taught by theologians with little or no training in secular history approaches (Denis 1997). Thirdly, church historians tended to identify more than emphasis on the theological and ecclesiastical identity of their denominations, with the justifying of by actions taking precedence over historical criticism (Dreyer 2017).

Fourthly, there has been a radical shift in Southward Africa away from merely considering the terms of the transposition of certain denominational forms of the Christian faith from Europe to Africa but rather in terms of the contextual feel of African peoples (Ross 1997). Fifthly, mail-1994, several theological faculties have been closed or restructured to form part of the faculties of Arts or Humanities. Theology itself, never mind church history, is low on the list of 3rd institutions' funding concerns so Theology itself is nether pressure (Dreyer & Pillay 2017). Sixthly, in that location is a general lack of interest in Southward Africa in History as a subject field, never mind church history more specifically (Dreyer & Pillay 2017).

For whatsoever number of these reasons, a distancing from church building history has been observed in most theological faculties or schools of religion in South Africa. In 1992, the University of KwaZulu-Natal abandoned the designation church history in favour of the 'History of Christianity' (Denis 1997). The University of Fort Hare (UFH) and the Western Greatcoat too teaches History of Christianity. The Universities of Stellenbosch, North W and the Complimentary Land take all adopted the term 'Ecclesiology' (Dreyer 2017). In 2017, a determination was subsequently taken at UFH that the Departments of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology would merge to become the Section of 'Historical and Constructive Theology' (Bloemfontein Courant, 03 September 2017). This represents a further shift. An outlier in this tendency is the Academy of South Africa, where church history has been subsumed into a single Department of Christian Spirituality, Church building History and Missiology. The official merger of the iii disciplines happened towards the end of 2005.¹ Moreover, theological disciplines have been subsumed under Religious Studies at other South African universities or simply do not be. Church building History is dead; long live historical theology.

The rise of historical theology

Out of the shell of church history has arisen the language and discourse of historical theology that owes its origins to church building history but is not limited to church history. The new monarch ascended to the throne is distinctly unlike. The ascendance of historical theology has non been straightforward, given that there are some significant, merely surprisingly few, proponents of historical theology as a split up theological field of study.

Dreyer (2017) lists just 3 theologians who accept helped to ascertain historical theology - Ebeling, Bromiley and McGrath, with a fourth - Pannenberg - adding to the narrative. Dreyer and Pillay (2017) contribute a further three theologians - Heidegger, Bultmann, Barth - to the discussion.

German language Lutheran theologian, Gerhard Ebeling, began using the term 'historical theology' in the late 1940s, applying it to biblical interpretation. His primary concern was with how diverse theologians throughout history went nearly their business organization of interpreting the Bible (Dreyer 2017).

In 1978, American theologian, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, published what is today still one of the defining works on historical theology and it went by that aforementioned name. He divers the general work of Theology as the:

[I]nvestigation of the church's discussion most God with the intent of testing and achieving its purity and faithfulness as the responsive transmission of God's Give-and-take in changing languages, vocabularies, and intellectual and cultural contexts. (Bromiley 1978:113)

historical theology was, for Bromiley, non but a history of Christian theology but was in itself, theology (Bromiley 1978). However, even equally he sought to define historical theology, he asserted that 'an platonic historical theology lies across the limits of man possibility. Indeed, even the 'ideas of the platonic differ so broadly that what might estimate the platonic for some falls hopelessly brusk for others' (Bromiley 1978).

Bromiley thought, at best, that 'historical theology fills the gap between the time of God's Give-and-take and the present time of the church building'due south discussion by studying the church building's give-and-take in the intervening periods' (Bromiley 1978). An of import aspect of his work was to develop a framework for a historical theology methodology, which constitutes v approaches (Bromiley 1978):

1. Rapid survey, 'which attempts a sketch of everybody and everything'.

two. Detailed and multi-volumed written report, 'which tries to say everything about everybody and everything'.

3. Interpretative theses, 'which advance a series of interesting theories or theses according to which the cloth is grouped and which form the starting point for the interminable and inconclusive analyses, antonym, and synthesis beloved by specialists'.

4. Explanatory study, 'which tries to show the root and reason of what is said or written, and then that what finally emerges is a nexus of influence and interaction'.

5. Selective study, which chooses a few theologians and makes a fuller exposition of selected pieces.

Consequently, Bromiley understands that both the aim of historical theology and the methodology applied to advance historical theology will inherently impose selectivity. He acknowledges the subjective nature of this selectivity (Bromiley 1978):

In neither sphere can any definitive criteria be constitute by which to make the pick … Hence the final choice has an capricious element in which circumstances and preferences play a major part.

The terminal person referred to in both manufactures to define historical theology is British Anglican theologian, Alister E. McGrath, the foremost contemporary vocalism promoting historical theology. In the intensity and consuming reality of the nowadays, nosotros can too easily overlook the insight that all theology has a history (McGrath 2001). The particular concern of historical theology is therefore to lay bare the connections between historical context and theology (McGrath 2001). Historical theology is, for McGrath, a branch of theology which aims to explore the historical situations inside which these ideas adult or were specifically formulated. The universality of God's saving action is necessarily embedded in the experiences of particular cultures and, argues McGrath, 'is shaped by the insights and limitations of persons who were themselves seeking to alive the gospel in a particular context' (McGrath 2001). Christianity inevitably and often unconsciously absorbs ideas and values from its cultural backdrop. Historical theology is non simply a Christian rendering of history, simply something more destructive in nature, seeking to 'indicate how easily theologians are led astray by the self-images of the age' (McGrath 2001).

There take been numerous other voices providing important insights whilst not expressly labelling information technology as historical theology (Dreyer 2017). German theology philosopher, Martin Heidegger placed the question of human existence and historicity in the heart of theological debate (Dreyer & Pillay 2017). German language Lutheran theologian, Rudolf Bultmann had an affinity for Heidegger and entered into the debate on the objectivity of historical research and historical noesis (Dreyer & Pillay 2017). Wolfhart Pannenberg, another German language Lutheran theologian, advanced the idea that all theology is practised within a specific historical context; one of the central questions of theology therefore is the relation between faith and history. Swiss Reformed theologian, Karl Barth placed much emphasis on the dialectical tension between time and eternity or between humanity and God, describing history as a conversation between past and present wisdom (Dreyer & Pillay 2017). Barth had a major influence on the younger theologians Ebeling, Bromiley and McGrath and shaped their agreement of what was to go defined as historical theology.

Given my ain subjective vantage point, I value the voice of the former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. He argues that an ignorance and detachment from our past in fact handicaps the church (Williams 2005):

A Church building that shares the widespread and stylish illiteracy of this culture most how religious faith worked in other ages is grossly weakened in its witness. That witness has to practise with a promise of universal community that is grounded not in assumptions about universal correct and reason only in a narrative displaying how communication is fabricated possible betwixt strangers by a common relatedness to God's presence and act in history - in an historical person. (p. 113)

Williams sees the past as a set up of stories we tell in order to sympathise improve who we are and the world we are now in (Williams 2005). He likens our relationship to the by every bit to a foreign land and to historical characters as to strangers (Williams 2005):

Adept history makes us think again most the definition of things we thought we understood pretty well, because it engages non just with what is familiar but with what is strange. It recognizes that 'the past is a strange country' also as being our past. (p. 1)

Furthermore, Williams suggests that adept historical writing is ane that makes the familiar get unfamiliar in order to get in clearer; in other words, our identity now is:

[B]ound up with a whole range of things that are not like shooting fish in a barrel for me or united states of america, not obvious or native to the globe we call up we inhabit, withal which have to be recognized in their solid reality as both different from us and part of united states. (Williams 2005:twenty)

For proficient or ill, nosotros are more indebted to our theological past than we will e'er truly realise, because (Williams 2005):

Who I am as a Christian is something which, in theological terms, I could only respond fully on the impossible assumption that I could see and grasp how all other Christian lives had shaped mine, and more than specifically, shaped information technology towards the likeness of Christ … I do not know, theologically speaking, where my debts begin and stop. (p. 27)

Williams cautions that the characters that historical theologians engage with, and to whom all Christians are indebted to diverse degrees, 'are not modern people in fancy clothes; they have to be listened to as they are, and not judged or dismissed - or claimed or enrolled as supporters - too quickly' (Williams 2005:11). He also cautions against seeking a definitive history and argues rather that 'We don't have a single "grid" for history; we construct it when we want to resolve certain bug near who nosotros are now' (Williams 2005:5). There is a fine balancing human action between seeking continuity - linking of the present with the past in a manner that is familiar - and discontinuity - seeing the strangeness of the past in regard to the present - in history. Still, this is an important balancing act and central to the chore of historical theology. Williams argues that 'the take a chance of non acknowledging the strangeness of the past is as smashing every bit that of treating it every bit purely and simply a foreign country' (Williams 2005). In other words, there are 2 extremes to be avoided: seeking flawless continuity with the past and thinking who we are now and what we believe as being completely discontinuous with all that has gone before. Williams, like Bromiley, also recognises the ultimately arbitrary method of engaging with the past and trying to brand sense of it or interpret for the nowadays. He posits that (Williams 2005):

[T]he truthful Church has no real history, since it is always that community of persons (non wholly coterminous with its membership of the visible institution, in which there will e'er be those not fully obedient to God) in whose lives the kingdom has come. (p. xvi)

This paradox between the visible and invisible church throughout time, between the strangeness and foreignness of the past and between the sense of continuity and discontinuity with our present forms of Christianity create many challenges in the written report of historical theology. Only the challenge is no less important and Bromiley and McGrath outline several benefits to historical theology laying claim to the throne of church history, inter alia:

• It shows how the church has moved across the centuries and continents with an ongoing continuity in spite of every aperture (Bromiley 1978).

• Information technology offers examples of the way in which, and the reasons why, the conformity of the church's word to God's Word has been accomplished or compromised in the different centuries and settings (Bromiley 1978).

• It brings a valuable accumulation of enduring insights as well as relevant warnings to today's church (Bromiley 1978).

• It demonstrates that certain ideas came into being under very definite circumstance and that, occasionally, mistakes take been fabricated (McGrath 2001).

• Information technology maintains openness that theological development is non irreversible, and the mistakes of the past may be corrected (McGrath 2001).

Bromiley, like Williams, cautions against a theological arrogance in our approach to a theological engagement with History so that (Bromiley 1978):

[T]he criticism will be constructive, non condemnatory … and both criticism and blessing will be undertaken with humility, for is not the historical theologian himself a participant whose piece of work comes under the aforementioned test?

Historical theology in Due south Africa through the eyes of Dreyer and Pillay

Following Bromiley, both Dreyer and Pillay argue that historical theology is first and foremost theology, and therefore, proponents of historical theology are theologians not historians, although they may make utilize of research methods associated with historical enquiry (Dreyer 2017; Dreyer & Pillay 2017). The traditional approach to church history has been to divide history into four periods (Early Church, Medieval Period, Reformation and Modern Period), and so to depict the primary personalities and events in each era. Both Bromiley and McGrath followed the same design with their approach to historical theology. Dreyer and Pillay depart from Bromiley and McGrath.

Dreyer thinks that historical theology could include seven themes with a strong historical and ecclesiological focus (Dreyer 2017). Material should be structured within a matrix that connects the nature of the church to the history, mission, practice and governance and then that it tin function within a coherent structure, one that facilitates learning and open give-and-take. In their combined views, Dreyer and Pillay refine the concept. The same argument is advanced that historical theology should accept a thematic structure which enables a contextual approach to interpreting history, especially a reading of history that empowers the quest for Africanisation likewise every bit decolonised narratives. The themes have been arranged in Table 1 above for ease of reference.

Dreyer and Pillay (2017) apply a slightly broader championship in subsection one, 'Introduction to historical theology', equally opposed to Dreyer'southward (2017) 'Nature of the church'. This allows for the question 'What is the church?' (or the nature of the church building) to be addressed only as well the critical questions 'What is history?' and 'What is the meaning of history?' The aim is to brand sense of the past, trying to understand non just what has happened only why things happened.

Subsection two, 'History of the church' versus 'History of churches', is similar on both counts; merely the erstwhile gives the impression of something definitive, which is not the intent. In both papers, the authors acknowledge that a definitive history is not possible and that local relevance should be established, of doing 'history from below', as articulated by Vosloo (2009).

A similar critique tin can be levelled with Dreyer's subsection iii, 'Mission of the church', which in Dreyer and Pillay (2017) is listed 4th as 'History of missions'. Both are rooted in understanding the church as existence function of the mission Dei, albeit that the interest of churches in the world throughout the ages has creative controversy and conflict through its very many missions, something the latter title gives greater nuance to.

The governance or polity of the church is outlined in Dreyer's fourth (2017) theme and sixth subsection in Dreyer and Pillay (2017). This is a nod to the fact that church polity and church history have traditionally ever been part of the same section. Church lodge arises in relation to specific historical contexts, and these contexts modify, which historical theology brings to the fore.

Dreyer's fifth and 6th (2017) themes are 'Doctrine of the church' and 'Theology and theologians', which have been combined into a single subsection past Dreyer and Pillay (2017) as 'History of Theology'. This possibly makes more than sense, seeing that theologians, their theologies and the shaping of the doctrines of the church are inextricably linked. Understanding this historical background is crucial to seeing how the by interacts with and can be applied to the present. I agree with Dreyer that 'historical theology finds its most lucid expressions in the study of theologians and theology through the centuries' (Dreyer 2017).

With the combining of 'Doctrine of the church' and 'Theology and theologians' into 'History of theology', Dreyer and Pillay (2017) are able to add Ecumenical history as a subsection seven in and of itself. The authors maintain that 'tracing the origins, piece of work and witness of these ecumenical movements is imperative in understanding and appreciating the history of the church in the globe'. More importantly, it provides a way to counter one of the initial critiques of church building history that church building historians tended to place more emphasis on the theological and ecclesiastical identity of their own denominations. This opens windows on a wide range of interactions and emphases.

Dreyer's seventh and terminal theme, 'Church building and social club' morphs into the subsection 'Public theology' (subsection five). This inclusion is controversial. Public theology is establishing itself as a separate theological discipline. But Dreyer and Pillay (2017) advance a convincing statement that 'public theology requires sound knowledge of social and ecclesial history' and has to 'tread carefully in club to avert the pitfalls of generalisation, lack of nuanced historical soapbox, exclusivism, hypocrisy and pessimistic world view'.

A theme hinted at

Dreyer (2017) argues that ecclesiology should be the cornerstone of historical theology, although information technology should not be limited to ecclesiological questions. One theme that can come under ecclesiology is the study of the trans-disciplinary context, which Dreyer (2017) mentions. A relevant example from the trans-disciplinary context is the link between the natural sciences and environmental theology, which when stated sounds obvious only is also the remit of historical theology. Both science and religion have arisen in specific historical contexts and have interacted to shape the linguistic communication and thought of the other, hence the topic beingness perfectly suited to the domain of historical theology. Science and faith are inextricably linked.^two It was only every bit the discourse of ecology science developed that information technology gave ascension to the theological linguistic communication that is now normative in green theology or eco-theology. The Historical Theological methodology can be practical to specific streams within theology such an evangelicalism in relation to environmental science, which Peter Houston (2018) has done past examining the socio-political and environmental events that were formative in the early Lausanne Congresses and the fruition of these dynamics in Cape Town 2010. Not only is there a recognised 'greenish' theology from the end of concluding century, but an emerging 'blue' theology in light of h2o scarcity becoming a critical issue in the 21st century. Tentative theological streams of thought on water are emerging in what has variously been described every bit 'hydrotheology' (Russell 2007), 'aquacentric theology' (De Gruchy 2010) and 'blue theology' (Ferris 2014) and collectively engaged with in a S African context by Marais (2017). Ched Myers, who is perhaps most well-known for Binding the Potent Man - A Political Reading of Mark's Story of Jesus (Myers 1988), one of the primeval commentaries to take an empire-critical view. Much of Myers' subsequent teaching and activism has been linked to issues of peace and justice, merely in contempo years has metamorphosed into ecology justice, specially to practise with h2o (Houston 2019). He is a gimmicky example of how theologians and their theologies evolve over a life time, something that historical theology uniquely gives infinite to consider.

This space in historical theology is important because it can be a artistic infinite for the exploration of theological ideas, dialoguing with other academic disciplines. The widening spectrum of scientific and theological reflection has encompassed much of the natural sciences as was evidenced in the August 2013 volume of Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae that historic the work of Professor Cornel du Toit. But there are disciplines similar geomorphology that are still far removed from reflections on the human person and thus not a traditional signal of departure for theological engagement. Houston (2013, 2014) has brought some primal concepts from geomorphology such as the ideas of inter-connectedness, holism and scale perspectives into conversation with what could be called 'geo-theology'.

Whilst the trans-disciplinary aspect of historical theology has been hinted at in the construction laid out by Dreyer (2017) and Dreyer and Pillay (2017), its profile is marginal. No specific mention is made of the significance to historical theology of an orientation that is non but towards the social sciences and public theology merely likewise towards the natural sciences, seeing that in large measure it is our theologies that motivate the valuing or devastation of God's world.

Conclusion

Both Dreyer and Pillay, separately and collaboratively, have offered profound reflections on historical theology as a theological discipline in its ain right, stepping out of the shadow that church building history has long cast in South Africa. Their argument is avant-garde and affirmed that, when properly structured, historical theology has a major office to play in enriching theological conversations that are of import to the ongoing transformation, if not reformation, of the church building. Still, given my bias, it is perhaps inevitable that I also conclude that more needs to be fabricated of the potential for these theological conversations to exist trans-disciplinary in nature. Church building history is dead, long-live historical theology!

Acknowledgements

The discussion on historical theological methodology is drawn from my Master of Theology (M.Th.) in church history and Polity, 'Roots That Refresh: An Historical-Theological Date with Jewish Repast Traditions and the Commemoration of the Eucharist in the Anglican Church' (2007), awarded by the University of Stellenbosch. This amounts to about xi% of the article.

Competing interests

The writer declares that no competing interest exists.

Author's contributions

I declare that I am the sole author of this enquiry article.

Ethical consideration

This article followed all ethical standards for a research without straight contact with human or creature subjects.

Funding information

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-turn a profit sectors.

Information availability statement

Information sharing is not applicative to this article equally no new data were created or analysed in this written report.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated bureau of the author.

References

Bromiley, G.W., 1978, Historical theology: An introduction, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI.         [ Links ]

De Gruchy, S., 2010, 'Water and spirit, theology in the time of cholera', The Ecumenical Review 62(2), 188-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-6623.2010.00057.x        [ Links ]

Denis, P., 1997, 'From church history to religious history: Strengths and weaknesses of Due south African religious historiography', Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 99, 84-93.         [ Links ]

Dreyer, Due west.A., 2017, 'Educational activity historical theology at the Academy of Pretoria - Some introductory remarks', HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 73(4), a4596. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v73i4.4596        [ Links ]

Dreyer, W.A. & Pillay, J., 2017, 'Historical theology: Content, methodology and relevance', in D.J. Homo (ed.), Theology at the University of Pretoria - 100 years: (1917-2017) Past, present and future, pp. 117-131. https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v38i4.1680        [ Links ]

Ferris, Thou.H., 2014, 'Sister h2o: An introduction to blue theology', in S. Shaw & A. Francis (eds.), Deep blue: Critical reflections on nature, religion and water, pp. 195-212, Routledge, New York, NY.         [ Links ]

Houston, P.C., 2013, 'A cantankerous disciplinary chat on mural procedure', Scriptura 112. https://doi.org/ten.7833/112-0-83        [ Links ]

Houston, P.C., 2014, 'Exploring the mural of historical theology through the lens of geomorphology', Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae forty(1), 273-289.         [ Links ]

Houston, P.C., 2018, 'The long road to Cape Town 2010 and an evangelical response to a global ecology crisis', Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 161, 54-70.         [ Links ]

Houston, P.C., 2019, 'Bluish theology and watershed discipleship in South Africa', Acta Theologica 39(2), 31-47. https://doi.org/ten.18820/23099089/actat.v39i2.3        [ Links ]

Marais, North., 2017, '#RainMustFall - A theological reflection on drought, thirst, and the water of life', Acta Theologica 37(2), 69-85. https://doi.org/10.18820/23099089/actat.v37i2.five        [ Links ]

McGrath, A.Eastward., 2001, Christian theology: An introduction, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.         [ Links ]

Myers, C., 1988, Bounden the strong man - A political reading of Marking's Story of Jesus, Orbis, New York, NY.         [ Links ]

Ross, K.R., 1997, 'Doing theology with a new historiography', Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 99, 94-98.         [ Links ]

Russell, C.A., 2007, 'Hydrotheology: Towards a natural theology of water', Science and Christian Belief 19(2), 161-184.         [ Links ]

Vosloo, R., 2009, 'Quo vadis church history?: Some theses on the future of church building history equally an bookish theological discipline', Scriptura 100, 59-60. https://doi.org/10.7833/100-0-653        [ Links ]

Williams, R., 2005, Why study the past? The quest for the Historical Church building, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI.         [ Links ]

Correspondence:
Peter Houston
rector@stagnes.org.za

Received: 05 Oct. 2019
Accustomed: 09 Mar. 2020
Published: xiii May 2020

1 . Department of Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology, viewed 05 October 2019, from https://www.unisa.air-conditioning.za/sites/corporate/default/Colleges/Human-Sciences/Schools,-departments,-centres,-institutes-&-units/School-of-Humanities/Department-of-Christian-Spirituality,-Church-History-and-Missiology.
two . Alistair McGrath, the major proponent of historical theology, is now Andreas Idreos Professorship in Scientific discipline and Religion in the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of Oxford, having relinquished being Professor of historical theology.

mccoythemarly.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222020000400005

Share this post