Method vol 1 no 1

METHOD

1, No. 1

Spring 1,983

METHOD Journal

General

of

Lonergan

Editor:

Mark

EDITORIAL Daoid BurreLL Notre DaI€ Mattheu Lanb Mar$Ette Fped Laurenee Boston CoUege Eugene Ilebb l4ashingrton Patrick H. Byrne Bos'ton College l.eftra JeKLppe llctre DaIE S€lnj$ry Elizabeth MoreLLt L,ycta Mary{rEnmt Sebastian Moore I\brquette

Studies

D.

MoreLli

BOARD

Frederick CopLeston or<ford Frederick E. C"oae Regis CoUege w a L LL A m J O n n S t O n Sophia Bernard TynneLL Conzaga MichaeL Gibbons Manchester Tinothy P. FaLLon Santa Clara MichaeL 0 'CalLaghan Georgetcrfrr ?homas McPartLand Seattle Philip Boo Riley Santa Clara

uauLd Jraca ChicaEo Hugo Meyne 7L Calgaq/ ,laLte? Conn ViIlarEva Ben F. MeAe" l.b!,taster Robert Do?an Regis CoUege ELLeen ue NeeDe ltEas l,lcre Geof frey Pnice !4arlctEste! Carol Skrenes L,yola ltarynDunt

Method: Joutmal of Lorergan Studies ailrs, fi-rst, to prcnote origjnal research into the netHological for.udatiGrs of tlre sciences and disciplines; se@rd, to further interpretirie, historicat, arral critical study of t-fe philos@rical, tieological, ard netiodological writillgs of Bernaad lorErgant and, third, to encourage i-nterpretive, historical, and critical past and present, rdp :&lress queEltirns, study of tijnkers, i-ssues, arxi tfsres ill a nnnrer that brilgs to li$lt tiE folJrdatidtalrole of tlE intentidEl subjecE of ccnscioJsness. Institutiornl SubscrLption (geanly) Indtt:i&tal Subscription (yearLg)

S20.00 S12.OO

Orders Prepaid in u.S. Funds OnLy A biannual jcirrial, Method is Fbfished in lr4arch and Octcber. Cryrtri-hutors are reqested to foUcnr the Lfdversity of Chicago Manual of Style in preparing manuscrj-pts. Address nanuscripts ard related @rreslqdence to the editor and all other correspordence t! tlE rrEnager, Method: Jourmal philosodry, of Lonergan Studies, DeeartrEnt of Llroh Malyrsnt Universitlz, Io'lola Blval. at W. 80ti Street, Ios Angeles, California, U.S.A. 90045. Cogfrift Poliql: AII materials pbfi*'ed in Method: Jounn1. of Lowgan Shtdiee are ccgarighted b1 Method. Suhrdssior of an article to Metlnf, entails tle autfpr's agresrEnt to assign tlE @rytigfrt ts Method. Articles, Dialognrs, I{}bes, ard Book Reviens aFpearing in Method nay be reprodEed for research purposes, for tr=rwral rrefer.errce, ard for classr@n use !'rittnrt special peunissicr ard witlput pay{rEnt of a fee. Itris permission does rDt extertt to ooFyitlg for gereral distrib,rtisr ard for tlE cl.eation of collected rdod<s or antlDlogies. Itese ard all otjer ridrts are reserreat. Method: Joumnl

of Lone?gan Studies

is sustaj-ned W IpyOLA MARYMOUN? UNLV,

Cover De6i9n by W. IEr.r El€ck Special

ltranks to ceorge Atkjrscl

Cof1ti*tt

1983 by Metlrcd.

March 1983

VOLUMEl

NUMBER 1

METHOD Journal

of

Lonerqan Studies

CONTENTS

Christianity uithin the PoLitical of Communi,ty and Enpit'e Lonergants Energence

Earlg in

Use of

Compler

Analogy

Dialectics Matthe\r .

.

Frederick

E.

Systens

.

L.

Lamb

I

S.J.

31

Oyler

47

Hughes

60

Crowe, David

.

Dialogue: A Critique of "Lonergants Notion bg Ronald McKinney, S.J. . A Reptg

to

Glenn

A RepLy

to

RonaLd

of

Dialectic" clenn

Hughes

Ronald

McKinney,

S.J.

McKinney, clenn

.

S.J.

Hughes

68 70

Notes: On AnaLAticaL Philosophy of Culture The

tLsefulness

of

Book

Revievrs

Clarke

E. Cochran: Politics

and

.

.

.

. Mark

D.

Morelli

74 82

: Cha"aate",

Navone, S.J. of the l'lord

and

Mind:

and

John

?he

Thomas cooper:

of

Telters Bernard

Tyrrell,

J.

89

S.J.

9l

S.J.

93

to .

Linits

Carmody

Christotherapg II: The Hea?t . . . Robert M. Doran,

An Approach

88

SpirituaLity

.

Christopher Butler: Christianity Rosen:

Conmunity,

TadDunne,S.J.

Bernard J. Tyrrell, S.J.'. Fasting and Feasting

Stanley

Critique HugoMeynell

PhilosophA

WiIlian Johnston: ?he Mirror and ?ransfornation

John

the

Analysis

.

.

M.

Jerome .

Dittberner

Hugo Meynell

95 98

E D I T A R IS N A i E

confidence, with absolute None of us can divine, iust is, above all and investigation what in the way of inquiry w e c an p r e s e n t . t i m e s . B u t u n s t e a d y demanded by the else, the that :erhaps discern, with some degree of probability, into the verv least that is needed is some serious research matter a simple Nor is it foundations of our conrmon endeavors. nethod perduring upon that discomfort, to settle, without of our or critique recovery, most suited to the discovery, culture is is that contemporary conmon heritage. So it back to our by calls punctuated, frequency, with i-ncreasing new or old to this or that roots, to things themselves, of foundational and so it is that the nany heralds basis; the prescribe own for of their also methods reformation declining or rescue of a seemingly renewal, renovation, are to however, these All too frequently, culture. "returns" and implemenby the adoption and accomplished be undertaken o f t e c hniques c o m b i n a t i o n technique or tation of some or other these techniques And too often and reasoning. of observation of, or dePartures revisions less than radical are something drj-ft the downward which hasten thought-forms from, the very and the enough, the ease of implementation of the age. often are sufficient and urgency relevance air of foundational happily abandon of hodmen who would to new hordes enticement gains and many modest, infrequent with its open inquiry, typical of the illusory sense of completion for failures, done according to a set of positive dutifully thinking of exPloration for do calls Only occasionally instructions. evoke our deepest pathways of our culture the subterranean a t o n c e s u m m o ning and accountability, sense of responsibility us to the perils and alerting inquiry us to new and energetic Heralds of this use of techniques' upon the slavish attendant but among and significant, kind are several tatter, cautious has, to radicality them one is to be found whose invi.tation upon insistence in its no equal either as I know, as far of the reinforcements rejection unqualified or in its hurnility for our allegiance compete that of inquiry and inhibitions pair of of this It is the presence in an ideologicalmilieu. and labors Lonergan's Bernard qualities that recomends rare anew the to approach from which as a center fruits their as well recommends and which problem of foundations, pressing deliberately nethod--that enpirical of generaLized his notion a n d u n d e r p i n s process which of Iearning self-correcting guide. Those a well--balanced generates all techniques--as A Study of Hunan Insight: monunentaL with Lonergan's ianiliar r^ri11 not and his cornpendious Method in Theology understanding by his inspired of a journal by the appearance be surprised and depth, the breadth, know already will they thought; whom for and to any others To these, labors. of his fertility is my great moment' it is of great re-thinking serious Journal of issue of Method: the first pleasure to offer you tdill hope that and it is my sincere Studies, l,onorEa, informatj-ve' issues and future of this find the contents emancipating. and, above aII, chaltenging

iet':':tarv 13PJ

Mark D. General

MoreLLi Editor

CHRISTIANITY WITHIN THE POLITICAI

DIALECTICS

OF COMMUNITY AND EHPIRE Irlatthew L. Lamb Marquette University As the challenges

trrentieth of

stage

of

would

say the

world

apocalyptic tiIl

history,

nuclear

has been rent

rose

be designatecl

victims,

masters

porrers versus

in

of

the

these

nuclear

of

power

warfare

surviving

victims

has fueled

the

so much of ploiting

its

slave,

victor

to

"victory

avresome evil

the

victims. Should

Physically

extensive

which

of

power dominating

ends in

of

w}:ic}r

has scripted and ex-

planetary

end the

conquerors

Any

hubris

or

hiatory,

face

end

parades.

The pride

the

irony

to

of

as death.

and victim,

potential

literaLLy

from

super-

and woe to

the

dominative

power,

The dialectic

of

master

and

the

victitnhood

of

universal

human beings.' The r^rorld religions

tant

resources

practices

of

only

religious

life.-

diverse

hood and death as well. denial, duism,

as in or

in

the

world life

of

religions those

dead. of

grapple

in

in

the

night of

paths with

of

the

of

in

the nost In

victim-

terms

as in

it of

Hinand

Islam narratives

conduct to

the

transcending

Judaism,

right

anal to-

human life.

myateries

foundational call

and

radical

humans are

tranamigration, or

Etories

death

be expreaeed as in

lives

the

provides

and yet

human life

terns

reveal

Burial

impor-

the to

planet,

specifically with

transformation,

gifted

traditions

contribute

on this

evidence

The central for

could

their

transcendence

Buddhism,

Christianity.' fuller

for

care

as inrmanent in

terms

incarnated

life-forms

religions

salvific

their

if

human drama array from

the

of

primordial

or

ways all

within

which,

believers,

Among all

ones known to

primitive

cherish

and memories

change or conversion wards

of

quite

humans, could

revealing all

envy the

colonies,

be no victory

dead.

which versus

The titanic

and. crushed

would

drama

The human roles

victors

vergus

has the

war machines human drana j,n terms

the

losers,

apotheosis.

its

have been stripped

of

it

victors

there

would

The masks of

conquered"

that

of

countriea.

massive

other

drama.

is

reaching

occur,

as victims.

empires

slaveE,

heroic

is

versus

known it the

some emerged as vic-

successions

undeldeveloped

arms race

scenarios

dominative nuclear

versus

(some and almost

abrupt

which

facea on thig

possibility

the

or enslaved

as winners

weakly

time

upon human history,

and confl.icts

by wars

humankind first

hurnan dranra as we have

the

curtain

d.rama has been marked by pell-mell could

the

a self-inflicted

of

and most trere destroyed

tors

for

we can envisage

end to

the

a close

to

gravity.

probability)

now. Since

dratts

century

unprecedented

change

torard from

the

METHOD

of

narrowness

it

be refused;

is

pressed

ing

into

I

fron

of

ambiguous legacies

of

Iectics the

political

superpovrers, the

on the

and rnon-archy,

wha! I

r contrast

one hand,

on

and syn-archy,

respectively The r.rords are hyphenated and designale (archel , one (monl principle principle larchel or plural-

orders

the bel-ief

with

and change social

orders

Syn-archy

the

1. The Anbiguous Legacies of is

Pluralism is

tianity witl gives

rneans differences. other. sive

of,

Leaving

and fostered

and personalization I

as well

as of

of

value

still aside

insofar of

life

that as it

Chris-

have and

of

of

to,

Pluralistrt Pluralism to

or mutually

may be genetically

one anexclu-

related

to

Problem, that of the one pluralism is a value to be cherold

is

on this

christianity,

The fact

Pluralism. are complementary

others a very

pluralism

, social , ethnic ' Po-

pluralisrn. the

and religion.

of

are contradictory

and the many, I would argue ished

tyPes

some differences

one another.

one another.

all

a fact,

is

Pluralism

Christianity--econolnic

differences

other

and

and Modernity

history

nature,

and religious

the questi,on

to

rise

sustain

to create,

up" by nurturing

and a value.

Almost

no exception.

cultural

litical,

sustain

"bottom."

both a fact

be found within

sustaining

creating, to create,

tends

bottom

Christtanity

always has been within

as it

the

"from

freedoms of

the

for

tends

"from the top dohtn," excusing its imPo(or defense mechanism) that the "bottom"

be an-archy.

would otherwise expanding

Mon-archy

orders.

social

and change social sitions

(archel

(sAnl principJ-es

cooperative

and changing

tory,

dia-

what I call

other.

no lanl ist

do with

the political

analyzing

study

In this

and christianity.

term an-archy

to

a little

of Plural,ism and then shor.ting how such to community, emPires or relate dialectics

politics

radical

pluralist

has not

then diseuss

the

The ur-

and modernity.

by first

and empire

comunity

outlining

by fi-rst

action

r shall

these ambiguous legacies.

and specifically

religious,

situation

our contemporary

gency of

of

and to

history

freedom and dignity.

for

christianity

both

wars as religion

of

victors

the

and public

convictions

l-ife

are

the victims

Power bent upon imposcan be used--and too often

longings

their

address the topic

shall

Christian,

of

dominative

and ]egitimate

extol

the victims

distract

can

the symbols of

twisting

come what may. Religion

wil.l

its

has been--to

call

than an indicative.

an imperative The cries

of

service

the

But the gifted

crusades and holy

of

drowned out by the clatter

of minds and

expansion

the

can shatter, animosity.

of deadly

tools

to

and faith.

always more of

is

authenticity

Religious into

death

ways of

the

through enlightenment

hearts

intrinsic planet.4

could

to

the

humanization

The whole of

be Presented

_

human his-

as an ongoing

CHRISTIANITI

experiment,

or vast

cerning

values

the

the

differences

one might

constitutive

argue

that

lack

only

of Yet

to

of

Ethical

discerning

better

the

human good,

order

of

the

archy to

this

in

responsible

sould

shere

the

presses tive

also

interests

valuea

with

promote

llhere

attempts

particular forms

deciding

instead

of

to

of

or

porer.

relate

to

impose seta Thls of

!lon-

pluralitu

to

forms

the

and the those

con-

settle

of

rould

nonarchy,

of social organltation 'universalizcd' through

are

toae

and questioni,

to

upon others.

forme

ir to

an-archy

individuale

political

the

tnany other

values

between

dourinative

of

inability

and valueg of

of

contributed

rcn-archy

a fundamental

[ort,

reeponsibility

relativism hag often

Le

conpleaentary

freely

of

ieeue

its

diacerning

various

aubverta

an-archy.

extent

that

actions

Beeking

to

re-

lt

exprereing erpand

effec-

in

vfest

human freedom.S profoundly

ations

of

major

of

netaphor

of

traditions

human freedom

regard

the

legaciea

connoteg Ylest. eould they

mdernity

free

of

both

shall

sketch

under

the faith,

dialectical

aome of metaphor the

three

nedithe of

major

The seta

more effective

have,

Drln three

betrayal

reaaon.

hos these

have prmted de facto

the

and responrible

Christian

betrayal

and good than

to I

of

betreyal

and the

"betrayal" in

in

arnbigruous

the

reason,

and of

Chrirtianity differences.

these

b€trayals:

empirical

of

arnbiguour

pluralistic

coqlponents

of

the

and queatl,ons,

interests

The enueial

values,

Power 18 doinative

The legacies are

values,

regarding

not

is

term mn-archy. of

intercsts

por"t.7

the

I

in

include

particular

dominative

rhat

babble.

intelligent:

hurnan drama doea not

the

in ways that

rneaninga

rnany, probably

it

of

human freedon,

and cultural

include

those

is

in

values.

such an-archy

through

sense

as a value

as a fundamental

of

by imposing

uponothers

thetnaelves

performance

principles

differences

mere unintelligible an-archy

of

and

has sooe prin-

a fundam€ntal

go evident

of

forms

no possible

social but

fear

logically

is

any argurEnt

Pluraligm

an-archy

many historical

iseue

betveen

own cogmitive

differences,

rf

unacceptable,

groups

for

relativism

and contradictory

the

an-archy not

is

such a pluralisn

nediate

tradictory

plural-

a fundam€ntal

discerning

for

consider

more their

valuee

mean a fundamental

it to

arguments the

position.6

The pluralism

and freedom.

if

are wont

their

intended

asserts

principles

valld

there

aince ao that

an-archy,

do

extent

hunan good?

the

human good,

a fundamental

for a fundanentaZ an impossibility. For

agnostics

how to

pronote

unansserable,

the

argue

the their

is

of

aimed at dis-

To what

differences.5

ontologically ciple

pluralisn

of

narne for

any universally

contradictory

exp€rinents,

pluralian,

of

notions

another

of

sets

question

the

are many contradictory ism is

of

series

and disvalues

and hou their

of

METHOD

to do so demand of

faj-lures pects

sets of

the

in

vert

o

failures.-

their

the

of

traditions

of

Yahweh. Jesus both

of

kingship

the

in narrative

God who is

Divine

in

manent in

the

srith 1I Kinqdom of God.^-

non-identified

and life

to capitulate

refusals

is

secular of

the

power:

identifications

Christ's

I-ordshiP

those the for

suffered of

the of

LordshiP

however

any acknowledgement,

chris-

the

and other

bishops

pirations

of

hin,

after

rrould oblige, pâ‚Źrspective

of

divinely the

of his

court

victors,

the

were separated,

conmunal

God to

transform

Roman EmPire. break

unity

hov the

had,

Eusebius

rerrriting

emperors

history

as divinely

of

more often of

as-

than

the

as other Caesarea

graced,

not-one

the other.lr

of

from the

became christendom.

prejudices

radi-

the nron-archical

theologians. in

prac-

An Athanasius

sr.rt constantine

christianity

authoritarian

and in

by affirning

others,

the

natured.l4

the

persons.l3

with

of

reign

dogrnatically

along

and throne

reinforce

of

ideology

inperial

com[unity

Godhead is mon-archs

eould

thought

in

this

of

An Augustine

nas paradigmatic.

apocalyPtic

sacralism

and powerful

the mighty

articulate

the

need for

Kingdon of

the

with

churches

of

with

dilenma

The Constanttnian

imperial

altar

with

forna' of the emPeror as divine.12 Sacto sacralism were strong. the temptations values with forms of of religious identification

the

not

imhow

freedom of

withi,,

and nany monks rrould cally

God is stressed

preiudices

Yahweh and the

of

of

however,

ralism

tice

the

a n d ,p r o

tianity,

world.

God and the

po\terless' to

sacralist

of so

imanence

Jews and Christians the

as prohibiting

rdere recognized

cynical

cod,

to

LordshiP

Both the

Roman Empire. Christ

how God is

and also

and called

hoPe

children

transccndent

Jesus,

re-

is

Exodus narratives.

the

of

this

in

faith,

become the

poor and the

both

centuries

first

In the their

the

of

world"

"the

but of

and emphasized the identity

hirn cod became one rrith

chaos,

stressed

emphasized how the

preaching

revealed

can be no images of

there

liberatinq

the

l-ikewise

christianity in

that

be uttered,

Name cannot

Divine the

unity

in

transcendent

not

both

theology

Jewish

Love.10

of

and poor to

lowly

empowering the

and love

to

and transforrned

to a discipleship

invitations

kingship

inherited God is

the

to

intensified

historical

and controlling

power dominating vealed

?he unity

expectation.

apocalyptic

The struggles

Davidic

from the

within

imanent

slavery.

were later

expectation:

apocalyptic

Divine

the

out of

prophets

between monarchy and the point

of

a people called

of

their

of

intensifi-

a revelatory

inherited unity

transcendent

the plurality

repudiation

a total

recovery of those assubwhich would. j.f actualized,

For Judaism christianity cation

not

us,

but a discerning

ambiguous achievements,

if

Although \dould

CHRISTIANITY

I in

shaLl

not

preached

and lived "the

signs.--

7A

the

prese

to

The efforts the

classical

thwarted

by later

scholastics

prophets

ing

spiritual

renerral

Rorne for

the

often

nation-states.18 for

rejected

the

religion,

fill

the

and the other

only

find

the

their

emergent

betrayed

by the

into

seventeenth

excesses

amReforn-

authori-

to

and lands

the pogroms,

of

were

imperial

powers of

By the

de-

virtues

inquisitorial

be continually

power.

non-archical

a

theologians

Roman Enrpire.lT

new peoples

brought

of

inperial

social

the cospel, by the

co-opted

west began to have its \rars of

Holy

sake of

his

Those efforts

the

The Cross uould

Slrord as colonization struggles

in

emporer-

tactics

and their

who legitimated

and theologians

of

into

hope and love.

popes and monarchs

tarianism

and educative

Graeco-Roman heroic

faith,

and recoveries missionaries

whereas the

the mendicants

of

betrayals

monasteries

the

evangelical of

of

The nonastic

barbariansr'

through bitions

series

as freeing

Gospel

so-called

tried

transformed

the

down to our own day.

ments of

Charlernagne

here

trace

Christianity

the

century

crusades,

the

inquisitions,

and repressions

of

a de-

cadent christendom.l9 phase of

The first the constitutive religious in

convictions

their

the

of

conflicting

Enlightenment

began to

a critically

empirical

of

elenents

uere

faith

sacralisms.

too divisive

The successes

intellectual

convictions

in

empirical

mon-archical

cosmologies

of

decadent

not of

operate the

thesis trial

in

applications

began to

to

the

for

belief

contested

in

torical

studies

Christendom,

concrete

particulars

tualisn

increasingly

and uniformity

The liberally ever,

hierarchical

reason

thrust

zation

with

Although would

tith

orderings hypoindua-

Freedon of than

in

the

human and his-

authoritarian to

te-

found a ba-

the

hege-

plurality

the cultural

of

enpirical

of

concep-

neu forms of

rnethods of the natural

increasingly

rationality,

alliances.

old

industrialization

the rdondrous unity-in-diversity

industrialj-

the

the

did

enpirical

oriented

attention

gave rray to

sacralism

broke

the aneien ,"g[^".21

by new forms of

became identified

uncover

of

As capitalist

manipulation.

called

identifiable

critical

was betrayed

secularism.-nical

not

of

la\rs rather

challenged

as they

energing

Nature

Deists,

the

EmpiricaLly

religions.

mony of

who, like natural

intelligible

revealed

proponents

The actiona

and incipient

man and society.2o

was championed by those

the

observation,

verification,

of

study

of

sciences

or hierarchical

methods of

spread,

reason. public

of

scholasticism.

tnon-archical

enpirical

experiential

ligion

of

\rith

As the

formation,

reason turned sis

accord

spheres.

natural

drar. together

The old

bureaucratic

expanded, empirical

quantification sciences of

regard

houorders

planet nature

and tech-

would gradually earth,

technical

as an energy

METHOD

reservoir

and dump site

Darwinism

hrould

a lqax weber fiction

of

for

legitimate

woulC,

despite

value-neutral of

democracy

prerogative

of

a

as

technical

or

their

highest

through

a

to

the

A major

rationalization in

last

the

as

phase

the

hesitant

the

description

of

reason,

and

of of

of

be-

such

annihilation. reason only

indeed

matter-

leave all

our

higher

of

of

"realism." and

did

not

positivism

Against

reason

would

reintegrate

alienation,

capitalist

pathologies.

repudiated

potential

of

of

neither empirical

such

the

This the

fact

hesitant

or

Quite

with was

reason

be-

beliefs

empj.rical

and value

reason,

value, in

in

therapeutic emergence

of

project the

or

perfor-

or of

fact

Enlightenment

reason.

that

more

rras a betrayal

and

Freudrs

the

were

only

betrayals of

of

maintaining

praxis

historical in

and

unverifiabl.e

actual

as

efforts

techniques

reaLism

sunderings

a critique

In

required

were the

realilt

These

empirical

a naive

naive

of

reason.

observational.

articulate

."u"orr.28

.

the

through

(Freud)

(Marx)

rneasurement,

Iiving

in

of

(Dilthey)

social

"facts"

began

methods

sciences

psychoanalysis

dialectical

Such

the

and

ideologies

of

Enlightenment

natural

their

psychic

reason

critical

of

the

explanation

theoretical

project

Diltheyrs

tique

power

irony

obliterates

Western

personal

conjunctions

enpi.rical

dialectical

of

of

emergence

that

with

critique

would

it

as

physical

empirical

differentiate

to

imperatives

enpiricism

ideologiea

ical

those transfom

naive

its

nance

crumble of

nuclear of

of

progress

fundamentally

is

as

modern

the

critigue

of

by

since

of

not

than interests

of

titanic

holocaust

efforts

to

mechanical

technrquâ‚Źs

of

from

emancipatory

trayed

The

reality

nuclear

with

efforts

socio-economic

less

dominative

betrayals

these

matter-in-motion

century

hurnan sciences weII

for that

academies,

often

undreaned

possibility

the

new

of

Life.27

A gecond the

in

enlightened

more

a

the phase

first

graduall-y

would

inby

for

conviction

deliver

mass

invaded

betrayed

the

the

in

the

reason

had

the

competing

of

were

rf

these

rnachines.

belief

only

but

inteLlectual

would

A massive

rith

churches

became off

denands

hopes

its

legitimating

The

seen

the

in-rnotion-26

of

by

military

can

consi-sted

be

."u"orr.25 put

play

life

hrhich

while the

inevitable

Politics

to

the

A social

strongest," legitinate

.24

to

institutes,

rationality

trayals

forms

the

enpirical

"pure"

expanding

planet

empirical

the

supposedly

secular

rationality

in

trust

the

trying

modern

research

bidders.

instrumental

and

bureauc.^"y

Enlightenment

not

and

betrayed

of

megamachina." of

disclaimers.

capitulated of

instrumental

policies

social

educational

the

culture

tlestern

modern

sad

engineering

aspects

potentj.al

crj-tical the

aII

his

into

social

groups.

dustry,

expanding "survival

factity

subsumption

pressure

its the

contrary.

Marx's cridialectnor

the

CHRISTIANITY

Analogous

to

the

efforts

of

the

efforts

were an intensification

forrners

appealed

considered

the

to

what they ings

of

Freud

considered

in

to

within

in

action.30

into

But their

patterns

of

suggestions

cally

therapeutically

or

rational

differences

reflection

comnitnent

a reflective

realization

to

could

not

reason could

only

or

of

(l)

They began ideologiWhatever

Dilthey,

Marx or

a serious

values

into

or

by attending

to

(Dilthey)

(21

reflection;

yet

realized

in

that

such a

instrurnental

such projects

psychopathological

intellectual

suspicion

technical

amnesia

and

divergent

value-conflicts.

(3) a growing

be achieved

(Uarxl

reflection

how reason rdas not

that

and

ideo-

hermeneutically,

the writings

be through

cultural-historical

exploitation

resolve

lntegrate

of

and (4) a recognition

either

of

reason have by no means

needs for

and psyche;

society

realization

the

in

of

sciences

critique

the

methods of

fundamental

establish

, or

optirnisn

on val.ue convictions.

on how to

and critical

(Dilthey)

etnergence dial introduce

betrveen them,

Freud began to

history,

dialectical

hesj.tant

against

the mean-

and emancipation,

repressive

and in

complementary

offering

of

hermeneutical-historical

of

so Dilthey,

over

and betrayals

they

insti-

therefore, elements of as the quas i -transcendental inter-

psychoanalysis

These elements

been integrated

what

contains,

to

the

against

as re-

and betrayed

and historicism

reason

these

Just

Roman Christendom,

diatortions

Habermas refers

ests , as practical as emancipatory in

over

and enlightenment

scientism

Such a dialectical what Jiirgen

ality;

in

societies

bourgeois

the

Gospels

human connnunication

empiricist

Christianity, reason.

a distorted

reason

the

in

empirical

(Marx) , or in the (rreud) .29 consciousness

capitalist

logies.

of

Christianity

appealed

and values

\rhether

and the

incrustations

tutionalization Marx or

faith

refolmers of

of the

, or

ration-

dialectical tictins

of

socio-economic

obsessions

and illusions

(Freudl .31 second phase of

But this emergence of in

its

dialectical

originators.

practical

reason

inexorable

techniques larist this

in

in

the

as they

an ivory

bureaucratic

As Arendt,

scientign,

their

technocracy,

and history

tower

a Cartesian

dialectically

of

in

any trace the

donrinative

have shown, they for

ahnost of

val.ue-neutral

legitimating

prejudices quest

by the

and instrumental

rroulat betray

scholarship,

Gadamer, Habermas and others nane of

that

a hesitant

were ambiguous even

up and betrayed

becane prerogatives

and cultural

nas only

beginnings then,

vonder,

H".*en".rtics reason

Its

be lluallowed of

"progress"

rationality.32 dialectical

Little would

the Enlightenment

reagon.

the certitude

secunations.

often of

did

a

" fundanentun inconcussun" (unshakeable foundation) , while in such scholarship was usually based upon the more financially

fact and

I'{ETHOD

academically states.-of

remunerative

psychoanalysis,

as weII

as other

a scientistic

$ras betrayed

by both

"adjustment"

to pathological of

sionalization

of

series

betrayals

of

rigid

state

conmented,

such betrayals

Laing and Szasz a little

to the Finally,

have successively

reduced

by suffocating

controlled

class

the its

and propaganda

the platitudes

to

party

and rigid

bureaucracies

not

of

and a profes-

psychiatty.34

of

tightly

socialisrns,

techniques

as Bettelheim,

ltarxism

and dialecticaLpower

critical

of

"realities,"

has contributed

wi-thin

potential

depth psychologicaLtherapies, reduction

and privatization

commercializ ation

expanding nation-

transformative

social

which,

analysis

have argued,

among others

of

"foundations"

the dialectically

Similarly,

As l'larcuse sadly

systems. hor.,

indicate

and humanization operate for the means for liberation and the theory preserving dornination and submission, that destroyed aIl- ideology is used for the establisha n e w i d e o l o g y . 3 5 ment of in progress of the Enlightenment Today the innocent beliefs pure reason,

through

whether

on the part

pure

supposedly

history--of

the old,

did

than

are no longer

demo-

in

modern.

And that

has brought

The Like

history--our

us even more victo

In response

reJ-igions.

inpure

confidence

and communist "exPerts."

modernity reason

by widen-

arms races,

now has a history.

nodernity

christianity, tims

of

seem underby the holo-

wars,

by a dwindling

both capitalist

of

convictions

intellectual

and local

and nuclear

and poor,

ing gaps betr^reen rich cracy

global

militarism

by increasing

caust,

or dialectical,

empj,rical

of

rnined by the devastations

the be-

competing mon-archical sacralisms, (as in the priproclairned a freedom of religion either nodernity (as j.n or a freedom fton religiron revolutions) marily middle-class trayals

of Christianity

Marxist

revolutions)

governments in

of

roots

the

problems.

seriougly

infected

of

temptation

in lpdernity:

that

are so good that

late

capitalist

more or

and in

less pervasive

why, yours

but

to

professiona lization PluraLism

get

policies.

reason lost of

whether of

Such strateqies we want to state

socialist

has suffered

seParation

as an underlying

institutional

countries

systems

have witnessed

(yours not with

rationalization

an eclipse.

or

the

be good.36 Acadernies in

" B et r l e b s b L i n d h e i t " good grades and jobs)

or technical

address

institutional

create

have to

But

Church and State

by what Gandhi perceived we don't

to Aca-

purity!)

its

and Academy, do not

state

with

As states

wed themselves

they

say,

seParations,

ones of

would collaborate public

enlightened

secular

institutions,

religious

from Churches,

legal

unlikely

of

institutions

(No wonder, you might

techniques

are

forming

themselves

demies. highly

its

. Instead

and research

educational divorced

with

Secularist

an increasing of

a

to question

itqtiry.3T mon-archical

CHRISTIANITY

systems in global

late

Third

forcing

cloninative

their

pluralism Cultural seems faced with (Earcusel or toa "tyranny of tolerance" Genuine public discourse seemg less and less ef-

World countries.

selling

out

to either

talitarianisn. fective

really

ln

The wars atrocities almost CIA,

etc.,

Catholic tury

pogroms,

techniques

l,lodern secular that

who worked

they the

for

Do the

ambiguous

us only

the

an unenlightened religious

faith

full

2. PoLitical

"ttre best

the

their other

fi-fteenth

cen-

or

all

the

scores

of

centuries

seems to

our

convenient

rhetoric,

is

planet.

r e a L Lg expecting

change

in

being

rBade that

tain

that

this

sill

not

ianity

and of

implausible realities (shades of the

instance

By a paradoxical have

of

Niebuhrl

rational

fervor.

guiet are

history

, must also

infallibitity-

in

the

of

it

by means

off

this

But such labels nuclear

arms race. I lenarian arguments

those

wh,o, despite are nass

produced of

betrayals

momentous iseue,

in which

thosâ‚Ź

arms race

an inmoral

to

becauee of

fantastic

military

Christthe

sho maintain

and inperfect

a quite

of machines,

t}re nain-

and statistics, the

express

and

large

depths

and rational

that

in

a of

ic-utopian-ni

twist'

nuclear

the

power

the

seapons

oppositorun'

continuing

dominative

led,

brush

of

than

history

so*"thirrg

to

apocalypt

of

nore

such as apocalyptic

like

reaLdreatrers

"eoinci.dentia of

sant

sonething

evidence

modernity

necessity

which,

observations.

the

subterranean

past

the

drama? very

unique

be used!

the

an abrupt

the

empirical

in

of to

historical

overwhelming

in

seriousness

"l'or

that

a cloee."39

or millenarian

sticking

who is

to

from

the

wrote:

realized

we might

protest

tiure

the

drawing

categories

utopian

have a hard

both

the worst

while

auggest

KarLJaspers

be emerging

hr:rnan drama on this

or

for

a condition

to

two related

suggests betrayals

three

has been gradually

oninous

innocence

conviction,

hundred years

it

modernity

cynicism

of Comnanity and Enpire

*betrayal"

of

and foremost

end of lead

inquiry lack

and of

an enlightened

Does the

situation.

in

from

of for

Inquisition

christianity

either

our contemporary

the

perversions

the

intensity"?

DiaTectics

The metaphor First

of

and rational

passionate

of

of

legacies

options conviction?

quote Yeats,

are

are

and sophisti-

surveillance

powers

appear (KGB,

police

onwards.

leave

of

make the

religion

secret

dwarf

spanish

political

and Protestant

rifts

and wars of

crusades

have such extensive

eta.l

torture

predecessors

amid such global

and repressiona past

of

Politic8

or decisionism.3S

erptivism

either

tame by comparison.

cated

consensus policies.

establishing

seems stamped with

to

now compete for socialism 'either/or" options on

and state

capitalisn

hegemony,

the

sorld faith

and political

10

METHOD

(against

leaders

cause a nuclear that

all

historj-cal

holocaust.

evidenced in

Jerry

Falwell's

paradoxical

I believe,

in

are forced

by the

leaps

an-archical

into

this

realities

avoid

is

the

the

kairos,

Such a politics roots

poJ.itics

Neither

of

practiced,

to

tence.

this

have,

until

in

order

to

within

this

inperialisnl

to

underlies,

pluralism

groups mon-archically

and memory uhere

league with

politics

A radical genuine

forns

to outline, for anity

much too

pluralism.

of

3. A Political

Dialectice

analogous

pattern

Habermas has shown, In

such a con-

ethos

dominative

of

one day becoming

nationof

dominant,

Right

The Christian

those

in our

hottever,

First

mode of

I of

would require

life.

I

should

constitutive

elements

discuss

shall

pluralism,

more l-ike

christi-

and then

such a dialectics,

namely

of PLunaLisn and Christtanity

The atnbiguous legacies under

and conflicting

opinion"

*o*r".{3

dialectics

a major

to

conununity and empire.

the dialectics

presented

have led

separation

in political gqne of the

briefly,

political

the

of

co-exis-

tranquil

societies.42

" pluralism,

of

of

within

Christianity

abides. such

participation

of

auch a pol.itic8 within

hope of

the

groups,

other

of

"public of

so-called

now making just

is

a plur-

in

the and/or manipulating 'sectarian" reservations

into

and

will

upon techniques

controlling

ritual in

argued,

the

or retreats

social

understood

For politics relied

of

succombs to

state,

country

rnust be truly

are adequate.

are usually

as Jllrgen

de-politicization either

This

nuclear

has meant the transition from colonspheres of influence" (new imperialisrn)

of managing

increasing

in ways

techniques

groups

some measure of

the bureaucratization

text

the

night.41

pressure

groups which

hre

the con-

the

has so brilliantly

such techniques

nation-statea

the

nor

now. usually

achieve

Internationally (old

which

pluralism

of

as they

dark

face

and mon-archy.

with

pressure

l{aclntyre

world

separation niee

co-existence

nor pluralism

as Alasdair

situation,

our

our endangered condition.

competing

see humankind through alistic

of

to

of

convictions

sense,

the

applied

"realists"

hre are

an-archy

of

the Tillichian

rhetoric

if

and intellectual

opposites

us.

engineering

roots,

and irrational

which respects

confronts

the

Neither

moral

in

that,

seriousness

must go to

arms race radical,

the

of pluralisn

illusory

Mon-archical

as

its

and apocalypticism.

suggests

a politics

religious,

flicting that

twist.40

to occasion or millenarianism

America finds

Listen

utopianisrn

and courageously

nrust initiate

not

po$rer to make blind

of

A second observation creatively

evidence)

Such mil,itaristic

of

and of

Christianity

metaphor

of

betrayal

or process

in

the

the

in

order

distortions

or

modernity to

indicate

alienations

were an

.

CHRISTTANITY

tl

'betrayed"

which victions

of

creative

Lectic

not

is

seen that

or proceas

bettreen

an-archy,

an-archy

nhich

means a relativism

quates

pluralism

alchy,

which

albiter

with

freedom

understood what

is

I term

syn-archy,

bued with freedom

there

choice.

are

or orientations

be approximated

through,

Both

an-archy exclude

pluralism

and order

of

syn-archy

is

any millenarian pluralist

efforts

fective cepts

ultitnately

freedom

insofar

for

agree while

are

The transformation

is

change

by appealing

learning

and acting

excoriates poses

not

intrinric

universality to

be mediated

Syn-archy

affirrns

tic

and insiets

vrorld

mediated

through

irunanent

within

There pluralism

is

the

that

self-correcting those

evidence

concrete

to

expand

not

free

Syn-archy

ac-

leave

them there,, their

own

freedom.15 invites processes

pluralism.

lts

of

unLversality of

of

An-archy

Uon-archy all

doj.native

processeB

and ef-

human freedom-

particularities

order or

their

imgnsed but

any genuine

that

the (an-archy)

ideal

and cocrces

through

nanl.fold

and order For

relf-correcting to

universality

love.

can only

affirms

and responsible

pluralitt

as inimical

a particularistic

ticularities

to

pluralism

or oppre3aea

extrin8ically to

freedom

treana.

does

as "where they are' repreaaea tosard intelll,gent truth

principles

toward

upon the

but

human

freedorn.45 that

hunan beings

they

im-

that

and responsible

one another.

but

a volun-

elites

mai.ntains

syn-archy

orientations

from within

and

universal

through

to

and pluralist

free

rrhere

real

principles

through

truth

include

countlesa

through

human beings

rnis-

the

one side,

comnon or

orientations

(rnon-archy)

of

is

that

universal

Syn-archy

based upon any utopian

ideal

argue

that

by means of,

one another,

not

mon-

respon-

dialectic

on the

as intrinsic

and non-archy

ultimately

I would

power or

to

quest

or

of

as ultinate

deterministically

imposed either

by intrinsic

Such principles

side

and truly

when the

claims

constituted

in

other

and values

no cotnnon or

Mon-archy

intelligence

ulti-

and so e-

other.

knorledge.

is

mo-

we have

freedom

legitimated

loser

deterministic

attentive

the

pluralism

must be extrinsically (or decisionistic) will

taristic

of

claims

only

con-

of

the dia-

and values

and non-archy

on the

but Indeed,

meanings

Inatead

an-archy

religious

individual

is of

power

fashion.{l

between

free

principles

rneanings

all

Historically,

this

An-archy governing

of

al.ways end up the

in

dialectic

that

a dominative

the

convictions

a dialectic,

is

states

one set

or voluntaristically. sible

of

and rcn-archy.

relativistn,

enthrones

through

originations

and the. intellectual

That pattern

dernity.

mately

the

Ch!istians

impar-

other

universality. our

pluralis-

rrill

learning

only

be

and doing

partlcularitieg.lT of

as self-corrective

Dvementa toward

touards truth

auch syn-archi.cal and freedom

within

the

L2

}{ETHOD

contemporary

traditions

of

Chlistianity

and of

two phases of

the

the Enlightenment. In Christianity ecumenical Holy

Roman Empire

sions.

we are \ritnessing

orientation.

The old

variety

nas motivated

The new ecumenism, while really

many, is

or

any of

at

directed

these

secular

it

diverse

at

or

other

convictions.

Rather

l c } n ed y n a n i c e

of

dialogue

convictions.

It

beckons Christians

genuinely It

their for

calls

reforms

which

of

or where

changed, genuine

living

deepest

aspirations

of

dom in

of

through to

the truth.

uniformity,

but

dialogue.

The ecumenical

are.based

upon the

that

religions

with

Indeed,

I would

tianity

arose it

leads

ing

clairns that

evident

in

to chri8tian

the

(if of of

out

the

and renewal

and action

within

of

Belf-criticiam

its Thia

in

in

and Christians.

out

all

the

to

the con-

of

s].rnbols,

not

by f""t.49

freedom is itself.

the

is

which in

are

lead-

fomenting

also

dialogues

not

generates

as it

Christianity role

chris-

and dialogues

and of

inasnuch

process

and Christians,

praxis

re-

movement rrithin

large

scientiets

The early eighteenth ligion in and more rejection

a unity a free-

world

within

by Iove,

dialogues

Jewish-christian

atheista

for

attention

experiences

of

beteeen

a the

for

the

arising

ecumenical of

The dialogue

refolm

calls a quest

Divine

the

importance

dialogues

with

compagaion and solidarity

anti-Senitism.50

humanist

\rith

conflict

aometimes threatened)

the

secular

conflict

of

and Iegitimating foundational

where those emerged have

now in

engendered

the

part

reflection

self-critical is

to

and

circumstances

as convictions

mixed marriages.

so-called

This

great

to

those

traditions

Ecumenism calls

faith

suggest

in

respond of

or where the

movements htithin

growing

history.

and cognitive

narratives

mere talki

of

Christianity

Christianity

manifestations

religious

of

to out

upon

held

more deeply

are now in

are manifestations

the victims

victions

of

all

deeply

It trusts, not in the dominative j.n the self-colrective processes of

Iigions

realization

rest

Jesus Christ.

imperatives

genuine

world

arise

world

not

Gospel of

are

or

other

their

in

r.or this

appropriate

and conflicting

movement rdithin

responsibility

imposition

in

anarchy

human freedom.43

of

diversity,

through

to

traditions

at

human beings which

and the

the cospel,

The ecumenical

renounce

been distorted,

those

of

humanisn--does

others

and renewals

d.iverse

the

Christians,

upon all

with

own traditions

have either

traditions out

calls

fears

or

preten-

presuppositions.

atheistic to

a true

of

a Constantinian

occasions

orientations it

beginnings

by mon-archical

based upon syn-archical

ecumenism--whe ther religions,

the

oecunene of

emphasizing between

and especially

in

As Hans Kiing observes:

in the criticism of religion rationalist of recriticism century, the classical centuries, and early-twentieth the nineteenth in cotttnon: have one thing recent cri,ticism as a rdhole is connected with of religion

13

CHRISTIANITY

rejection of institutionalized religion, rejection of Christianity of Christendom, rewith rejection jection of cod with rejection of the church. This rf,as true already and Holbach; of La Mettrie it was true especially Ir{arx and Freud. And of Feuerbach, this precisely critiis true also of present-day cism of religion . . ..51 The Christian rise

were not they

bear a particular

churches

and spread

of

nodeln

metaphysicians

were cornnritted

how the

authoritarian

churches

\dere both

pressive

projections,

atheism.

troubled

and bourgeois causing

ready are

beginning

beginning

to to

collaboration.

Political

much needed insights alienation

effects

Euroconmunism

reasons,

its

are

evidenced

also

science ations in

scientific

should

not

a\rareness

states

of

in

example,

the

in

objections

Russia

(Lysenko)

phase of

the

course

ongoing

and discoveries,

deducing Iike

the

all

project

language,

doned,55

The pturalisms

riant

sciences

efforts

sophical

of

of

are

reducing methods

their

the

all

in

on enq>irical

of

languages

in

despite *uah"t for

a of

lars,

a unified and aban-

criticized

an-a!chy.57 gcience in,

of

physical to

the

extensive

projects

matrices

reaulted,

in

illusions

reductionist

and of

the

have also,

undergone

from one set

done have not

a Feyerabend,

reflections

evolution

Enlightennent,

reason,

have been progressively

scientific empirical

of

to

and now in

The npn-archical

with

knowledge

verifiable

other

empirical

transformations. science

mon-archists

their

of

empirical

in-

w"

.55

first

dialoquea

and

which

and public

have made. Fundamentalist

for

of

theologies

poli.tical

in

ethical

and technologies

methodg and conclusiorr".5{

aarb both (creation-science)

self-corrective

collabor-

categories,

advance

empirical

the

oJ christian

the

Amer-

orientations

bet\reen

regarding

science

of

tacticaL

practical

the

and practitioners

monolithic

and Latin

syn-archical

advocates of

critigues

just

than

and debates both

integrating

and publicly

(Polandl

rpre

or al-

and

are

development

up,

The successors

for

clear

pseudo-scientific

United

are

and theologies

political

and scientists

dialogues

have had to dress in

Europe

as is

underestimate these

and secular

and sociol.ogical

Easter

and implicationE

tegrate

and re-

dialogues

theologies

dramatic

betr.reen theologians theoretical

with

illusions.52

psychologies

rrith

dialogues

the

oppressive

ongoing

pre-judgrment".53

in

of

christianity

Depth

econonic

in

and religion,

the

christian

the

has abandoned,

atheistic

ramifications

practices

and liberation

from

God;

much needed cross-fertilization

and ideologies,

transformative ica.

in

of disgusted

both

from

fruit.

bear

engage

by the

and pathological

within

humanism resulting

the

l4arx and Freud

human beings

and legitinating

alienations

The self-criticisms atheistic

merely

and intelligent

for

responsibility

Feuerbach,

which the the

example,

the bril-

philoxuhn'

METHOD

l4

and

torical

of

Einsteinian

the

alone

of

universe a

in

ates

of

of

charts

is

rationality

how

are

tists

and

and

gone

of

the

dialogues

and of

to

methods

and

Adler,

has

ltith

Jung

Rank,

unconscious of itself

The

has depth

or

psychology,

uncovered

many

de-

of

scisci-

colmedi-

in

of

opposition

radical

have of

series The not but

also

constitutive

what the

works

and

the their

reduce

to

and

suqgested corrected

of

appropriation expected

ongoing

with

associated

approaches

processes'

and

analyzed

been

paradigrn-shifts

was

of

course the

psychology

tendencies

therapeutic

only

the

in

under-

also

have

within

complemented new

the

Enlightenment'

the

reason,

depth

and

Frankl.

uncovered

public

and

"holism" the

sciences--have

natural

a

scien-

Bi'o-medical

ambiguities

any

psychologies

theraPies

Freudian

tects

Depth

argued.

much

imPacts

dialogues

of

Phase

hermeneutics.

corrections

alternative

many

and

history'bJ

desPite

in-

value-issues

the

for

the

of

Dewey' of

dialogue

transformations

debates.

the

of

those

and

enpirical for

dialectical

of

ideo logies--especially

of

critique

James

syn-archic

second

self-corrective

originators

a

often

instrumental

-64

practitioners

extensive

ongoing

the

in

so-called

utilitarianism

calLing

ground,

of

successors

advocates

faith

regarding and

and

murtinatio..I=

pharmaceutical

the

j'n-

to

rather

among

pubticly,

when

mon-archical

but

Peirce'

promote

to

of

fact'

In

their

responsibility

explicitly

gaining

ration-

a model

be

reapPropriations

the

nature

bio-ethics,

bureaucratic

making,

and

imPortance on

empirical

to

to

irre-

the the

inefficient'

self-corrective

concern

is

research

slowly

The

of

that

a

collabor-

within

crumbling

espouse

of

discovering

are

SimilarLy,

due

in

let

paradign-shifts

relatj'ons the

taking

vital

of

with

is

cine

decision

not

technologies

iaboration

and

politically

unions

issues

and

ences ence

did

they

enlight-

mechanics,

syn-archically

very

so much

pragmatism

of

increasingly

forning on

as

not

to

leading

"tolerant

r.'as thought

seen

is

pragmatism.62

r4ulgar

discover

interpersonal

potential

dicating

to

lhilo.ophically

bureaucrats.6l

critical

of

nature."'

what

authority

cornrnunal

and

formal

begun

it

work

bureaucracies

the

dogmatist

interdependencies

increasingly

is

efficiency

caLls

sciences which

of

instance,

Newtonian

natural

illusory.

somerrhat

is

ality

bate

Mechanics

complex

have

sci-ences

social

and

Quantum

unity-in-diversity

ducible

fl-ow

or

probability

erergent

series

to

point

for

he

justice

ongorng

shown,

"intolerant

do

ongoing

The

century.t'

our

to

able

enment"--were

the

and

his-

the

the

to

even has

Lakatos

mon-archy--what

nor

enlightenment"

skeptical

to

how the

and

sciences,

self-corrective

shifts.58

an-archy

how neither

are

methods

paradiqmattc

radical

of

matrices

social

developments

the

attention

an

indicate

Toulmin

or

Radnrtzky

Lakatos,

praxis and

by

the of

the

archi-

therapy

occasioned

t5

CHRISTIANITY

paradigm-shifts,

major

teteology reflection

on,

tique

of

only

and appropriation

Ievel- convergence neutics

as not

the

archeology

of

of,

hermeneutics,

ideologies.

values

An illustration

of

concerns

normative

of

Dilthey

this

object

of

both

elernents through

are

among these

works,

the convergence

orientation others

(such as Arendt, Bernstein),

course

resulting

and forms of

to

techniques.

demand explicit

of

praxis

to mere "practice

enpirical

convictions

the

but

hardly

it

not

thinkers,

reductions

an

of

as many

Peukert, public

of

alI

pluralisn

cenuine

reflection

Simi-

resenbles as well

lack

are

an-archy.

Maclntyre,

pervasive

dis-

issues

and politi-

upon the

above in ny discussions

and dialectical

Recovering

reason

and transforming

and technique,

indicate

objects,

societies.

through

of

dialectical

of

the

betrayals or

instrumental

Praxis

tech-

ments--does Gouldner

learning.

in

and leading

industrialized

or

of

conduct

iteelf

cur-

management social in

engineer-

which

as free,

In other to

and mech-

have seriously

words,

intelligent

the

ongoing praxis

is

discourse

freedon.

As Maclntyre the

in

ways

products

of

individuals,

techniques

of

between

and diverse

to crisis

performance

the perfornance

originating

and responsible in

to

of

formation,

to various

grocesses

self-corrective syn-archical,

distinction

or making

reduced conflict

human doing,

are intrinsic

and not

and policy

consensus, is

production

privatization

and politics

techniques,

classic in various

has become non-archical

discourse

public

the

authors

as the

The resulting

anization tailed

these

how technique,

or external

goals

language

rationatity.6T

praxis

ing.

to

structural

conununicati.on and dial-ogue itself. The reduction of has had the disastrous " -as-technique

consequences mentioned nical

of Apel

Ricoeur

or phenomenology

is

these

the

or

result

from the mon-archical

praxis

of

the

Horkheimer,

Becker,

of

po."i".55

ot

and deep,

Instead

!{arn against

living

publicness

Bultmann and

interests

impressive

to mon-archy.

Tracy,

cal

is

but

and struc-

hermeneutics

cornmunication

important

a meta-

and the cri-

and normative,

, through quasi-transcendental texts and syrnboJ-s, through praxis The differences

to

subject-oriented,

Heidegger,

theories

larly,

the

the critical

empirical

the

would be how herme-

phenomeno logica I hermeneutics

and subject,

and existential,

divergent

also

dialectical

empirical

through of

concerns

the efforts

and Habermas and the mediate

and Betti,

and existential

Gadamer, to

of

has led

psychology,

depth

has noved from the object-oriented,

tural

but

psyche became known (Ricoeur) .65 Indeed,

of

has demonstrated,

utilitarianisn

virtue

and others

as the

of

only

in

techniques

expansion

of

have shown how this

this of

context rewards

of

praxis--

and punish-

freedom make any sense.58 distinction

provides

for

IUETHOD

16

praxis

door

the

left

crises

especially

the

in

and

state

and

monetary

circufation

of

a mon-archical

is is

a mon-archical the

of

how

of

of

are

action

which

state

socialist in

ganizing

dialogue

and

of

as

the anc

dialogue

and

such

as

Soliin

cornrnunities

well

Part

on

capitalist

late

grassroots as

the

reflection

movements

Anerica,

on

comnunal

of

to

Attention

debate

religious the

opPression

and

terms.70

or

how

understands

poverty

hegemony

is

unethical

or

immoral

movements

Asia'

North

and

Europe

in

therefore,

economic

grassroots

and

America

through

Neither

influence":

of

the

and

tech-

activity

focuses

the

chaltenging "spheres

Poland

Latin

Africa,

those

tnstead

Neither, later

and

human

in

activity activity'

reason

dialectical

significance

longterm

public

of

generated that

in

freedom

econornic

of

intensify

even

stupid

of

advocates

idealization

than

which

genuinely

of

dynamics

idealism

materialism'

economies.

destroy

and

of

advertising.

rather

processes

evil

both

materialization

immanently

or

heur-

self-corrective

syn-archy'

manipulate

sooner

practices

economic

macroeconomic

darity

or

control

regimentation

cognizant

the

as

production

relate

in

foundations

conduct

or to

seek

the

the

to

niques

of

to

critical

new and

would

which

capitalj-sms,

late

demanding

expansion

attends

performance

are

an

socialism

Neither

both

praxes

theories

capitalism

Late

are

crises,

as

and

socialisms

state

both

hurnan praxis

of

istics

mon-archical

regimentation.

economic

macroeconomic

technique'

and

bureaucratic

and

dissolving

in

praxis

on

ambiguiti-es

suprastructural

hope

an-archical-

scientistic

economic

The

processes

to

open

and

political

his

w.ith

combi-ned

government,

self-correcLing

wj-th

mutually

interacting own rather

Mu.*'s

developments.69

reestab-

to

seeks

of

j"nfra-

of

techniques

Marxism

crj-tical

whiLe

infrastructuraLdynamics

production

of

relations

the

as

in

trusts

wj-thin

developments

ongoing

the

Marxism

manipulation,

structural

of

critique

scientistic

itself.

Marxism

tish

and

analysj-s

a Marxist

comunlty

or-

Russia

and

of

Pluralism

in

chi.a.71

4.

There

potitical and

new and

better They

cieties. all

institutions

and

not

what

I

the have

practicalLy

call

generated way

described conduct

guarantee with

techniques simply

other

to

nat

do

by

around. as

which

to

and

organize

are they in

value

the

Hence,

syn-archy.

Processes

They

humans

themsefves

and mon-archy'

perfection.

to

attention

an-archy

self-corrective

their

with

dialectics, action,

inquiry

dialectics of

opposites

illusory

the

political

a radical

emerging

transcends

which Such

is

and Enpire'

Conmunity

Cltt'istianity,

for

order

towards

the

regard

the

do

not

control

sake as

of

sothat

iudgment

humans

foundational and

theoretically exPansi.on

of

of

offer

CHRISTIANITY

effective count

t7

human freedom.

over

today.

against

While these

have to be good, ist

systems that

syn-archy

eventual

transnational sive

of

gigantic,

have clay

The political the one hand, are drawing of

the

their

to

ical

systens

superporders, them to of

the

produce,

intirnidate

race

both

their

of

a few victors

The illusory

political ity,

to

Iike

freedom,

comrunity individual Iike

or

like

group

freedotn of

structure ligious

of

aII

living.

transcends Coqmunity

human doing

or

the to

When com-

political, of

the universal when it

is

love,

gives

way to

and fears,

pluralist

as all the

cultural

through

cornnun-

Community,

truly

conmunity

at-

Comnun-

human praxis.

It

be-

radical

call

connunities.

and may die.

as radically

a close.

its

and responsible

desires

one!

rapidLy

dialectics

when cornmunity

betrayed

to

rcith

of

this

successions

situation

truth

their

of

dominative

is

this

arms

basics.

us out their

through

nuclear

and an-archy

social,

mediates

get

For those

fears

extinction"

Security

are drawing

universality

economic,

destroyed

for

$rith

pell-rnelI

their

enable

our mon-archical

return

with

and performance.

But this

(i.e., is

not

atrophies is

to

and possible

and ends in

uith

egoism

constricta,

and others

dialectics

flourishes.

freedom and praxis,

spheres

of

will

of

ignore

the mon-arch-

status,

superpowers.

pluraliem.

originates

freedom

into

superpower

of victims,

hunan questing

like

hunans to

higher

submit

with

centuries apotheosis

as values

and superpowers wars,

of

the

serve

on

reaching

the disposal

lve have to

infrastructural

pronotes

munity

ity

the

of

is

of

then

an-archy

a way out

dialectics

tention

the nas-

\deapons at

betr,reen mon-archy

coming .a dead end. syn-archy offers

scores

been an illusion--now

and nillions

option

that

and mon-archy,

outwards

own citizens

and diplonacy

power and vrars to end all of

to

"Either

illusion.

empires

out,

they

Nuclear

by competing

has exposed this

Superpower rhetoric

are They con-

are rapidl.y

tendencies

back into

offered

The centuries

out

arms race

value

who aspi.re

power has always

dominative

pointed

which

annihilation.

option

an-archy

aII

themselves.

system or be blasted is

bet\reen

The nuclear

and those

an-archical

efforts

and war machines and

points

and alienated

than

terms,

humans don't

organizations.

on the other

and project

they

and greater

Gandhi's

the human and plural-

syn-archy

As Jaspers

a close.

own value

acand

feet.

dialectj.cs

alienating

social

little

yesterday

their

ignore

bureaucracies

and syn-archy

proportions.

crisis

in

all

they

any and all

economies--but

idols

that

since

doninative

and of

so good that

are

claims

failure

infrastnucture

struct

seems frail

superpovrers of

go about trying,

latter

to make and sustain doomed to

Syn-archy

the dominaiive

the infra-

and re-

immanently

the

conpromises

particular). with

t8

METHOD

mon-archy

in

to

impose its

unifornly

upon others.

when this

order

occurs,

meanings and values either

it

or

instigates

ot' superpoDer in

No Lnpire

ernpire building.

legitimates

particular

history

Das ever !:he re,sult of lree choice on the part of all connunities of orer ohich it ertended its doniratiue poaer. The universality mediated

community is

hunan communities processes is

in

are not

of lrrars and violent

The tragedy

and maiming groups.

wars of

dominative

nron-archical

the

that

extent

genuine

could

fending

powers,

or those

genuine

conununities

and freedom.

techniques

defense

very

the

of

dialogue

and action.

that

basic

the

if

global

the

those

rift

caused

of

capital,

centralization

tarism,

are

not

allowing

the

quately

for

their

themselves,

duction

are beginning zation Iogue,

basic

to

with

provide

needs.

advances in the

formation.

are being

upon contror permanent

the

domain But this

infrastructure (fanily, micro-donain (cities,

when and free is can But

to do so.74 the

consequent

planning,

and mili-

to

the very

means for

provide forces

adeof

vast

decentrali-

conmunitarian

But those

forces

relations

pro-

technologies,

of

of

dia-

produc-

production

and domination.T5

A syn-archicaLunderstanding in

"defense" protecting

extensive

hampered by mon-archical

tion

super-

planet

on this

contemporary

technical

, and for

, debureaucratization debate, and policy

bent the

t'{oreover,

of

community

lvith

of

ap-

as these

nodern militarism

of

conununities

local

mili-

justification

that

superpowers,

by the

displacement

or

terms

were allowed

comnunities

that

does not

So-catled

genuine

human conununities

all

is

empires in

loses

An added tragedy

needs of

be fulfilled

rt

destroy

Mili-

or de-

insofar

building.73

justified

be ethically

only

I believe,

can,

empire

to

aspiring

danger

history

between mon-archical

conflicts

were nilitary

gaining

liberation

the \dars in

not most--of

to many--if

them

through

become actual.

the

to

only

and succomb to mon-archy'

would becone an end in itself justification of wars of such an ethical tarization ply

the

against

justified

uPon either

technique,

Like

control.

of

insurrection

once again

focuses

their

and freedom within

and only

resort

that

expression

are ethically

a last

technique,

external

of

liberation,

and debate

dialogue

like

tarization,

are

they

is

the

is

communities

of

powers,

imperiled.

conflicts

human beings

and destruction

disintegration the warring

of

self-

mon-archy,

way out,

"easy"

freedom is

community like

implemented,

slaughter

\then the

of

the

when those

and action.72

human learning

of

respected,

of

respective

and debate

dialogue

processes

corrective

particularities

pluralist

the

through

regions,

infra-structure

of

of

conmunity

any and all

ackno$tledges it

social

as

organizations

, neighborhood) , the mesoo r the macro-domain (humankind) . nations) , It is automatically. does not function marriage

CHRISTIANITI

t9

constituted

by and in

become restrictive prey

of

desires

cesses of

and fears

learning

powers its

quest

free

and art

easily

dininished

or

and mon-archy.76

Y"t

The quest

for

new birth; ize

into

freedom

come the left

of

dynamics

mon-archi.cal

claim

of

and psyche

with

whereas society

tractual.TT

This

account

teleology

the

freedon.

Freedom is which

"contracts" lated.

then

Nuclear

of

because it

time

every and again

is

to

real-

to

over-

vrhatever

or

poi.itical

can only

voluntary

fails

toward

is

ambitions.

to

be

and con-

take

into

responsibility

extrinsically

and

oriented

controlled

and manipuqo hand in

and mass collectivities

technique.TS

arms have norr exposed

community

is

too

resilienr.

order

time

sociology

human instinct for

symbol,

an-archy

with

press

to

as Cesellschaft

mistaken

to

alienating

can be bureaucratically

egis

in

as Ceneinschaft

tnon-archical of

try

our

try

its

psychology,

Irtonadic individualism

hand under the of

is

of

cotnnunity

instinctual

of

which

service

of

are all

returning

consciousness

The challenge

biased that

play

the

seems powerfully

keeps

en-

truth,

tendencies

infrastructure

the

for

orientations

by the

pro-

flourishes,

the unrestrained

instinct

can

self-corrective

quest

intelligent

alienations

into

the

and freedom

and connunity.

would

alienate

Conununity, when it

extinguished the

Hence conununity

can decay and become the

But these

collaboration

conununity

it

good,

for

A rnon-archically theory

the

as beautiful.

conununity

the

enter

which

members tonard

responsibly

human freedon.

and action.

ritual,

to

and for

or constrictive,

and society.

the

As Jonathan

dead-end Schell

of

such separations

indicated

recently:

By threatening life in its totality, the nuc}ear peril creates new connections betldeen the elements of hurnan existence--a new mingling of the public and the private, the political and the emotional, the spiritual and the biological. He then

recalLs

and deed"

into

and by which physical

Hannah arendt's which

we are

notion

born,

we are challeRged

birth.

to

of

as it take

a "cotTEnontrorld

were,

for

of

word

a second time,

responsibility

for

our

Then he continues:

Now the whole species is on itself the naked fact pearance--to protect our Formerly, the future wa8 be achieved . . .-

called on literally to take physical of its original apbeing through an act of will. given simply to usi now it must

This effort would cdnstitute a counterpart in our conscious Iife of reason and will of our instinctual urge to procreate. And in so doing it would round out and complete the half-finished coluton world of pre-nuclear timea, which, by the time nuclear weaponE were invented, had enabled mankind to learn and to suffer but not to act as one.79 What ScheII

overlookg

and responsibly between

the

free

spiritual

is

that

this

collaboration and the

effort between

biological,

to

promote

public

intelligent

and private,

has been more and less

I'IETHOD

going on in

successfully

the

no$t be in

to

trying

predicament

the

we

hope we have .

only

the

fragil-e--is

are . But conmunity--however

of

has by and large

it

Adnittedly,

we would not

been unsuccessful--else

praxis

syn-archical

communities.

and sustain

create

"to act as one" would be to submit to lvhat might be the cal led a "Meta-Superpower " which would dominate and control o f a n actualization globe. It would be a mon-archical entire

otherwise,

guarantee

really

on the very of

assert

ishnents

to

power of

is

which is

a praxis

To the

human freedom.

uine

creasingly

dominative

and extend

itself

also

they

can continue

porary otneil

betueen

distinctions of

types"

,h.r"

the

of

acceptance

the

for

when thi!

cratic

by the

tions

on the

of

for

charisma

I

uncovers,

authority

to

opPosition

the anil

authority these

"pure

between

and ve?tration-

concerned

Yith the

the

latter hin,

uhich

he

and consensus, or bureau-

rational

has begun. external

and

Rational

where acgoals

or ends'

are by and large reduce authority

or bureaucratic

subjective it

dialogue

valious

and many after

rational

or to highly Indeed,

of

or wonders \tith

|-he Zueckrationalit?lt

to

tends

Thus weber,

other.

left

the

and value

instrumentally

one hand,

ordn or an-

its

bureaucratic"

ileber maintaina,

authority

authority

guestioned. either

Little begins,

are primarily

and the

of

As Weber develoPed

"miraclesn

roorn is

"routinization'

bureaucratic

punish-

leader or prophet tends to denand charisrnatic ( t h e examples given ale all male) esvalues he

pouses or rePreaents seems endoued.

of

own contem-

its

through

between zueckrati,onalitat

them on the differences alit|t.82

ages,

of

fear

to base the distinctions

he tended

authority,

or

Possible among conand so the authority

only

power in

"rational

authority.

charismatic"

seeks to maintain

as it

traditions

authorityand

of

a dialectic

"personal

the

understanding

such a syn-archical usual

down the

co-

power becomes in-

its

and transform,

gen-

denigrates

enticements

external

anC debates,

dialogues . 81 s pasE .

believe,

extent

extend

temporaries, of

conununity

that

and consensus are not

cooperation

ment.

that

and dehumanizing,

through

then, of

expansion

authority

extent

to

and consensus,

operation

the

in

and issues

which originates

(power as empord-

power

. corununal authority,

subjectsl

and responsible

instead

and consensus--

cooPeration

human form of

genuinely

The

or pun-

rewards

conununity rests

of

and conscious

p1..".80

first

authority.

on external

rest

would feed

the

arms in

not dominative

Authority

itself. free

only

the

free

ering

does not

could not it

since

species

nuclear

community is

of

conmunity

upon the

the

generated

which

The authority authority

survival

the

fears

of

himself,

indicated

and, as Schell

Weltgeist

Hegelian

technigues,

not to on the

value-charisma and "privatized" according to weber, that the

can happen,

zl

CHRISTIANITY

routinization

of

ever

kind

on with

roll

and pohrer,

The trouble nuclear ities

of

are of

before,

history

served,

since

changed but the

our

truth, the

responsible then

rdhich fosters must enter

and expands

into

which

Gandhi

warned.

is

only

corTmunity

our

processes

self-correcting

learning

our

activity. around

breakthroughs

from persons breakthroughs

r

tems in stein's is

not

it

the past

have often

the

just

reality

authority

to

which

be preased

too into

long

them to height Iong

too

the

is

case.

it

has aLlowed

sys-

Read Ein-

theori.es.86

servitude

shott come

creative

power.

ideal;

turn of

to

by non-archical his

we

own hunan

the

those

their

or a regulative for

which

in our

have always

that

of

been expropriated

ideal,

take

But

ecpreseione

to

a tragic

Ls is

once

Yeg and no.

allow

us to

would

legitinate extrinsicall.y on ythat happened to reflectiona

order

frastructural and its

in

of

human history

human communities.S5

within

Unfortunately,

in

A atudent

systems

and for

Indeed,

and stupidity.

creative

tetnptation

ouraelves!"

and destroy

manipulate,

the

and power are rtithin

so many expressions

creations,

They are our and control,

foolishnees how all

just

are

trust

dominative cooperation

Each generation

and doing.

remarked: "You mean all we humans have is yes in the sense that all the mon-archical project

for

and consensus.

resist

Authority

hope. of

to

pro-

we "recover"

will

mon-archical

we are

if

of to

quests

the

then

freedom.S4

effective

process

this

cages

concern

human empowerment of

the

is

iron

these

cooperation

how illusory

ob-

has

appropriation

only

as genuine

community

of

nurture

which

and beauty.

r,re realize

and how real

way out

comrunity

freedon

of

sha1l

power is,

against

of

race

viewpoint

As EinEtein

and a concerted

communities,

arns

the the

power everything

and reflective

congcious

As I nengo on as usual

to

such mass produceal ueabe used.

nuclear

of

The only

thinking.

heuristics

authority

only

not

if cage.l'83

the probabil-

higher.

businesa

that

nilI

discovery

infrastructural

mote those

are getting

namely,

a while but

have developed

prevails,

to "rationalize" from as a nmiracle"

instance

a growing

through

cages

iron

circumstances

unique

us'

become an "iron

as usual

who nant

authorities

be described

the

the

authority

once in

and excite

eventually

business

and statistics,

thig

will

or an-archy

by these

what could

pons in

is

the

and bureaucratic

come along

sone of

if

annihilation

forced

rrith

that

is

weapons and,

tioned

too

a movement it

of what-

Institutions

and members. Every

will

The

anti-authoritarianism.

rational

their

personality

to

are obvious.

by officials

served

a charismatic he starts

leads

charisma

presuppositions

non-archical

comnunity is

its

the

in-

power

and alienation

by

cornpeting mon-archical

"y"t".".87 No, we humans are not alone'

If

our pregent

grave hiatorical

METHOD

22

it

possible

of

crisis

pluralism

the

species, freedom ward the

before,

how to

cating

power,

dominative

mon-archical

recover

and empowerment of

God. The basiLeta

of

cod reversed

the

histories

our all

of

conmunities hungry, of

the

revelatory

to

conununities

over

such trifles

to

from their

untold

the of

"bearers

of

victims

and exalt

Divine

hope and love.

with

the of

to

the

God would (Lk.

lowly"

apocal.yptic

Mystery

beckons

As such,

the

parables

reality

with

which

the

The

sinful

The empire of

thrones

whereby

planet. and call

and love

faith

Godrs which

idols

gift

of Godrs empire are parables

faith,

coming reign

identify

a free

is

the

the

drama on this

historical by Christ

and oppres"ion.89

remarks,

as Perrin

of

the kingdom, or empire

systems or

expectation,

empowerment, of

preaching

the reign,

sorrowful,

domination

or

lrele,

as and

then why in

and death, ourselves

mon-archical the

so much of

The parables

1:52).

indi-

authority

from a faith

arising

human tendencies

too

cod as proclaimed

down the nighty

"cast

and pluralist

life

eternal

tou Iheou,

the doninative

have captured

poo!,

for

movement is

we humans can cooperate

If

Jesusr

began in

Christianity of

into

in many

and connunism?88

as capitalism

enter

and to-

own makinq

ecumenical

\re destroy

God's name and our own nust

empire of

the

love. of

(in

to conversion our

were exproPriated

convictions

religious

seek consensus on issues

of

cornmunitarian

the

religious

knowledge born of

empire srith

idols

convictions

religious

as humankind it-

have echoed the dialectic

Mystery,

Divine

living

If,

ways.

calls

their

away frorn the

and truth)

if

of as a

survival

our very

al.most as old

is

with

religions,

polj-tics

a radical

in

sake of

the

itself

dialectic

The world

self.

for

and syn-archy

precedent,

without

is

nucl-ear annihilation

us to engage as never before

calls

us

they

rdere concerned."9o Through his formative the

discipleship

religious

became the

Parabler

(praxis)

own life

hope in

Godrs reign

mon-archical

empires

of worlit

this

potitical are

churches

tian

pecting perial trayals or

I traced

article

this of

the

occur

identified

cratj,c

other

cotnbinations or

mon-archical

r.rhenever the with,

christendom.

the

of

former

latter.

When this

of

atand over

ritual

both

and

exPectation, against

Tonard the beginning

the of

and recoveries

the many betrayals

Kj.ngdom and cultural

and/or

trans-

was constituted

between corrununity and empire.

dialectic complex

aa Love,

history.

some of

and resurrection

conrnunity

These comnunities

Parable.

incarnate

of

, death in

Chris-

communities

"borrowings"

ex-

from im-

Beslnnbols and organizations. are pressed into the service of,

This occurs,

resulted however,

in

forrns of

there

arise

theo-

CHRISTIANITY

z5

movements of proclained

renerral

This the

dialectic

"pure

types" to

of

of

church

challenges

for

takes

from the

rejection

to

reversal

new expression

of

the distinction

of

to

through

thej-r

the

repreas

of

for

the

In most resulted

part

on the

of

down.93 of

reactions

to

church

reactions

"Gregorian

top

ernploy technigues

Roman authorities'

churches

were largely

so-called the

and sect the

"sects"

reform

cast

is

reversals.

sects

from

seem to

church hrithin

Too often

calls

when it

Weberrs supposedly

redernptive

medieval

efforts

always in

I believe,

Reform" Such ',top

separation, the protes-

reforners.94 has now passed

be neaningful.

logue

realities

poorer

forts

at

ating

grassroots

reform

churches

from

form those non-archical and bourgeois love.

Within

haps,

suffered

(even therell cess by our Yet, to cling

clear

corner. in

enations

will

Either blast

we stop

It

is

time

Christians

gether

cooperate

has graced (syn)

in

freedom.

re-

as emporfaith

which

and per-

has,

such a renewal

to

loae

in

this

begin

species

into

no religion

fearing

an-archy

and other and trust

them.

It

the pluralistic

is

The kairos

to

accept or our

pro-

of

ourselves illusiong

seem than

our

times

a nu-

and one and ali-

a d.arkness where no nation, rill

grace

and stop

religious the

Christians,

nore doggedly

have backed us into

and dialogue,

our

time

Mystery

and their

no culture,

is

to

would

conservatism church

hurnana, including and al-ienations

ue shall

It

earnest

ef-

liber-

as u,etz indicates,

expectation, betrayals,

and alienations

cooperation

no society,

of

churches

w. have nothing

teaches,

illusions

illusions

another,

of

the

under

genuine

in

thousands

the

is

and alienations.

one another

our

World, in

to

process

the Roman Catholic,

underway.95

their

nore vitally

practice

to

from mon-archical

as history

do to

that

is

nove-

ecunenical

paternalistic

of

cornmunities

my own church,

dia-

the

denand,

sherein

order

and techniques

transformative

this

Third

below"

The times

in

basic

most

the

residues

illusions

to

of

below,

liberalism,

and freeing

on in

Already

"from

conununities.

a Second Reformation

of

to witness

conmrunity.

and renewal

ering

going

the churches

redemptive

way anong the

such strategies

dialectics

as those

challenge of

for

The tensive

and debate--such

ment--must

is

redemptive

Like

impose uniformity

strategies

The time

they

the

sect.

For exanple,

as lras evident

to

versus

authorities

reform

the mon-alchical

rdhich tried

tant

which

tou Theou finds

two to make a sect.

authorities.92

down'

in

misunderstood,

church

authority,

allow

cases it

to

is

categories

tends the

reform Basileia.

pr.*i".91

in christian in

or

by Christrs

this

earth

i.dolizing

connunities

freedom

with

begin

which

time rre begin

really

dynamics of

freedom

again.96

mon-archy. the

to

live

in

Divine to-

(archy) . The

24

METHOD

life

of

For

then

faith

own

Lives

For

Christians

life,

death

flourish

will

we shal1 the

be

mystery such

and

in

of

such and

knowingly

creation

a redemption

resurrection

of

a genuinely willingly

out of

of

we were

which

creation

christ

pluralistic

appropriating

is

all

incarnated

world. in

our

born. in

the

Jesus.

NOTES 10.

ah. dialectic of master and slave, cf. G. w. F. Hegel, (New York: Harper The Phenomenology of Mind, ttans. J. B. Baillie between this & Ro!,r, 1967) , pp. 228-40. There is a relationship in the nuclear implicit and the universal victimhood dialectic arms race, cf. E. P. Thompson and D. Smith' eds., Protest and SuruiDe (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1981); also Jonathan s c h e l l , T h e F a t e o f t h e E a r t h ( N e v tY o r k : A l f r e d A . K n o p f , 1 9 8 2 ) . one of the few condemnations leveled by the Second vatican Counof total war, cf. cil was directed at any and all manifestations Caudiun et spes, par. 80. 2cf. wildred C. Snith. ?ouards a l,/orld ?heoLogy (Philadelphia: westminster Press, l98l), pp. 3-44; Langdon Gilkey, Society and t h e S a c r e d ( N e e rY o r k : C r o s s r o a d , 1 9 8 1 ) , p p . 1 5 - 2 5 ; R a i n u n d o P a n i k k a r , Mooil; A Challenge to Modernity ," Cross Cutrents "The Contemplative vol. 31, n. 3 (Fall 1981), pp. 26-72. 3cf. u. Eliade and J. M. Kitagawa, ed,s., The History of Re(Chicago: The University of chicago Press' Ligions, 5th Printing 1970); also F. Heiler, ed., Die ReLigionen der Menschheit (Stuttgart: Philipp RecLam, 1962), pP. 13-53. 4Cf. oavid Tracy, lhe AnalogicaL Inagination: Christian (NewYork: Crossroad, 1981), Theology and the Culture of Pluralisn cf. tr{atthew and humanization, pp. 754-229- On personalization 1982 KeIIy and social Justice," Lamb, "christian Spirituality to be published) . Lecture (Toronto : st. Michael's college, 5cf. Bernard Lonergan, Method. in rheology (New York: Herder & Herder, 1972) , pp. 235-49t Alasdair Maclntyre, After Virtue: A of Notre Dame Press, Study tn Moral ?heory (Notre Dame: University 1981), pp. 1-59. "Ibid.,

pp. 103-13, 238 ff.;

also Lonergan, op. clt.,

pp.

'cf. trans. by w o l f g a n g J . M o n m s e n, I h e o r i e s o f I n p e r i a l i ' s n , P. S. Falla (New York: RandomHouse, 19801; williarn A. Williams' (New York: oxford University Press' 1980) ; Empine as a ,laA of Life From the Colonial Age ta the Present Harry Magdoff, Imperialisn: (New York: Monthly Revield Press, 1978) t Irving L. Horowitz, BeAond and Consolidation in the Enpire and Reuolution: Militarization Press, 1981) ; A. Brewer' Third tlorld (New York: Oxford University (London: Routleclge & Kegan Paul, Maruist Theories of Inperialisz 1 9 8 0 ). SThus freeforce. on effective dominative power is extrinsic A Studg of Hunan L)nderstanding dom, cf. B. Lonergan, Insight: pp. 619-33. (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1978, l1th Printing), 9thi" according to Lonergan. of dialectics i" the function Cf. his Method in Iheology, pp. 128-30, 235-56. It also corresponds to Johann B. Metz's notion of subversive memory. cf. his Faith in Historll and Society (New York: Seabury-Crossroad, 1980) , pp. 184-204.

CHRISTIANITY

25

10cf.

1,"" Cormie, "The Hermeneutical Privilege of the oppressed," Cathalie Theological Soci-ety of America Proceedings, VoI. 33 (1978), pp. 155-81 and references given there. 1 - -1C f . Ben F. [eyer, The Ains of Jesus (London: SC}| Press, (New York: Cross1979t; Matthen L. Lanb, So:Lidaritg uith Vietins given there. road, 19821, pp. 7-12 and references

lZcf. ttob".t JedIn, ed., Hdndbuch der Kirchengecchichte (Freiburg: llerder, 1973, 3rd Ed.l, VoI. I, pp. 147-1.62, L87-I92, 249-260, 433-441. AIso cf. the biased account in Edward Gibbon, lhe Deeline and FaLt of the Ronan Enpire (New tork: The Uodern Library, 1937) , VoI. I, pp. 382-504. 13cf. s. Peterson, "Monotheisnus ats politiechee Problen,t' (Munich: and "Chrietua ale Impenatoen in hie Theologieehe Traktate Kosel, 1951), pp. '15-147, f50-164. Also, Alfred schindler, ed-, llonothei.enus a7.e politi.eches Pyobl,en? E. Peterson und. die Krittk (Gutersloher: der politischen Theologie Gerd Mohn, 19781 . 1{ti*othy Earvard

D. Barnes, Constantine tlniversity Press, 1981), pp.

L,ttid.,

pp.

245-275. Atso Jedin,

anil Eusebius 224-244. oF. cit.,

{Cambridge:

vot.

Irl1,

pp.

3-93. 16cf. pp. J"dirr, op. cit. , YoL. :rIl2, pp. 265-282, vol. III, 16 ff. Peter Brown, Soeiety and the HoLg in Late Antiqui.tA (Berkeley: p p . of California Press, t9821 , University 103-195. l7Cf. pp. 15rl-158; M. Cl.agett et aI., eds. uaelntlzre, op. cit., TtteLfth-Centuny Europe and the Found.ations of Modern SoeietA (Madi6on: University of Wisconsin Press, 1955); Eric Christiansen, ?he Northern Cnuead,es: The Baltic and the Catholic F?attie? 77001525 (Minneapolis: University of l{innesota Press, 19801; J. cilchrist, The Church and Economic ActiDitU in the Middte Ages (London: Macmillan. 1969); Gordon Leff, The Dissoluti.on of the Medieval Outlook (New York: Ilarper E Row, 19761 . 18cf. Edr"rd P. Cheyney, The Daun of a lleu Era (New York: Harper & Row, 1962, 2nd Ed.), pp. 142-246; Lewis llurnford, The Condition of Man (New York: Hareourt, Brace Jovanovich, 1973), pp. 152-200; F. L; Nussbavn, The ?niunph of Sci-ertae d.nd Reasoi (Nen York: Harper & Rorr, 19531, pp. 61-197. 1 ' -0C f . Peter Gay, The Rise of Modern Paganisn (Net York: Randon llousâ‚Ź, 1957); Claude Manceron, Tuilight of the OLd order, trans. by P. Wolf (Uen York: Knopf, 19771.

20cf. The Trigins H"rb.rt Butterfield, of Moilern Scienee (London: c. Bell and Sons, Ltd., 1965); Hiram caton, The ?rigin (New llaven and London: Yale UniverEity of Subjecti.uity Press, 1973) 2ltil1i". L. Langer, PoLiticaL and Social Upheaxal, 1832-1852 {New York, Evanaton alrd London: garper E R o s , 1 9 6 9 ) , p p . 1 - 5 3 , 1 8 1 237; Arno J- lrtaysr. lhe Pereistence of t h e O t d R e g i n e ( N e w Y o r k : Pantheon Books, 1981) .

)- -)C f . ?he lechtological Jacques EIlul, Systen (New York: Continuutn, 198O); llax gfeber, Eeonong and Soeiet|, eds. Guenther (Berkeley, Roth and Claus wittich Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 48-55, 2L2-298. On bureaucracy pp. 755-lOO2. Cf. also Anthony clidden8, cf. vol. II, Capitalisn and Modern Social ?heot'y: An Analyeis of the writings of Marc, Durkhein and Mas lleber lCanrbridge : Canbridge University. Press, 1 9 7 7 1, p p . 1 3 3 - 1 8 4 .

METHOD

26

23cf. caPra, The Turning Point: seiettee, society an'7 ttitiof : h e R i s i , n g C u l i u r e ( i ' l e wY o r k : S i m o n a n d s c h u s t e r , 1 9 8 2 1 ; C a r o l y n laeictrant,-rile Death of lgature (San Francisco: HarPer & Ron'-l'980)t (Boston: South End Press' 1980)' ettat. C"i", Ecotogy o" potitL." 24arrthorry

op. cit.,

Gliddens,

PP. 178-182'

25Max

Reason (New York: of fnstlumental Horkheinet, Ctitique T h e S e a b u r y P r e s a , 1 9 7 4 ) ; M a x H o r k h e i m e r , - Ec L i p s e o f R e - a .osn S e a b u r y P r e s s , 1 9 7 1 1 ); M a t t h e r " L a m b , 9 o l i d d t ' i t y illew vorf,'rhe dtth VictLno. PP. 28-50. 26r.

c"ptu,

2TJonathan

oP' cit.,

The Faie of

Schell,

101-163'

PP- 53-74'

the gdrth

(New York:

Alfred

A'

Knopf, 1982). ZSAlasdalr

uacrntyre,

oP. cit..

p{r. 60-102'

29!r"tth",, L. Lanb, Hietorg ' Method and Theotogg (lli-saoula' Press, 197-8i, pp- 55-210; t'tichael Schneider' !{ontana: ssho}ar'5 (Nes York: Synthesis A Uarci.il/freudi.an Neuroeis anil Citiliation': Imagination rft. S-al"ry Press, 19?5!t ltartin Jay, ?he,Di'atectical Brordn and Co., 1973)' (Boston, Tironto: Little, 3Oltax Aer,

Horkheiaer, 19721, pp. 3-45,

Theoig Critical 18&-252.

(Nevr York:

Herder

and Her-

3lnudolf A. Makkreel, Ditthey: Philoeophen of the Hunan --. Press' 19?5) ' University irinceton (Princeton, New jersey: Studies at3-421t râ‚Źszek rtolakowski, Matn cunnenta of Mataisn' pi.-ios-js9, Ll"rr". P. s: Falla (6xford: clarenaon Press, 19781, pp' 335-42C; (Berkeley: Uftiand Faith Judith Van Herik, freud: on Feninini'ty Press, 19gZ) , pP. 9-105' of California versity 32lt.rr"-G"otg Gadarner, It'uth and l4eihod(New York: The -seabury PreBs, 19?51 , p;. Lg2-23L; Hannah Arendt, Betueen Past and Futune L97-264i r'riLz Press, 1951), pp- 4l-90, ifr"'viLi"g itl"r-i"if, lcleveland and Ner York: s;;;";-;d. , rhe vafi5ti'es of Histotv cotnPany, 1956), pP' {6-144' The world iublishing 33Thot" ?heory of 'tiligen Habe.nmas^ The ct'itieal uccarthy, (Carabridge. Mass. and London: The ltIE Press, 19791 , P?' 40-52' 50-98. 34Rob"ta Boyers and Robert orrill, eds', fi' D' Laing and A.ntiThonas szasz' The Myth HarPer s Row,1971); e"ycni.iiry itlew'yort: (earden iitv, New.York: Anchor Books, l979li )ii"i.it"tniripy o ' a v i a " i n g l e b y , ' Z d . , e n i t i . o l - P s g e h i a t r y , ? h e P o L i t i e e of M e n t a l "Freud 19801 ; Bruno Bettelheim, (frew i6rx: Pantheon Bookl' Itealth (March 1, 1982), pp' 52-93' u"i tn. Soul," The Neu rorker 3Stterbert Marcuse' Sotiet AnaLyeisMarcism: A Critical and R' Hahnel' ttr' Albert (New York: Randors House, 19S1), riv; The south End Press' 1981)t ?heony (ioston; ilansis^ and Sociali.at of s o c i a l i s n {university ;;;;ie c. ioages, rhe Burealuctatization of lLassachusetts Press' 1981) . 36Rugh..r.n N. Iyer, lhe Motal and PoLitical Thought of ^Mahctna LL3-292' Press, 1973LPP' Oxf6rd'University

Ganrlhi (6xford:

37s"*rr"l SehooLing i'n Capitalist Bowles and Herbert Gintis, America (NewYork: Basic gooks, Inc., 1976), pp. l8-51, 53-149' 3SMaclntyre, op. cit., Pp. 5-34; Thomas Mccarthy, op' cit', pp. 213-231,-fSe-f-8S; David-Smith, ilho Rules the t|nioersities? rhe iirew vork: titonthly Revi.ew Press' 1974); Richard Bernstein, Theory (New York: Harcourt, of sociat and PoLitical Restructuring t975t . Brace, Jovanovich,

CHRISTIANITY '3-9K- ._ Lectut'es of

27

Jaspers, Philosophg and the I,lorld: SeLected Eseaga and ( C h i c a g o : H e n r y R e g n e r y c o . , 1 9 5 3 ), p . 2 2 .

t' n -Daniel C. !,laguire, lhe New Subveneioes: Anti-Ane"icanisn t h e R e l i g i o u s R i g h t l N e w Y o t k t Continuum, 19821 , pp. 1-55. ^-1- M a c l n t y r e ,

op. cit.,

pp. 103-113, 238-245.

42Jii.g.r,

Habermas, Conmunieation and. the Euolu&ion of Soeiety, Thomas Mccarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 79761 , pp. 178-205. !'?- D a n i e l Maguire, op. cit., pp. 87-140.

trans.

44I b"Ii"rr. that Alasdair Maclntyrers argunent Ln Aftet, Vittue supports this observation. Both an-archy and non-archy rest ultimately upon technique as controlling meaning and value, whereas syn-archy rests ultinrately upon praxis and hence is constituted by the will to dialogue and to conmunicative competence in reaching public policy. truly In this regard syn-archy as I develop it here is closely related to the works of the Frankfurt school. 45Th" ,rnd.t"tanding of freedom I am referring to here is dependent upon the work of Bernard Lonergan. Cf. his Insight, pp. 595-533. For a complementaly urrderstandj-ng of freedom as expanded effectively practice, through virtuous cf. Maclntyre, op. cit., pp. 169-209. L' -AC f .

Lamb, Solidarity given there.

references 47thi" standing Insight,

uith

Victi.me, pp. 7-23,

28-55 and the

aspect of syn-archy is equivalent to Lonergan,s underprocess of learning. of the self-correcting Cf. his pp. 174-175, 285-303, 713-718.

48Fo. contrast bet\reen contemporary ecumenism and the monp "r e t e n s i o n s archical of the claesical oecumene, cf. Eric Voegelin, press, The Ecunenic Age (Babon Rouge: Louisiana State University 1974), pp. 115-133, 300-307, andl how this contrasts rrith the position of KarI Rahner. Cf. Rahner's Concern fon the Church l[ert York: Crossroad, 1981) , pp. 77-186. 49Cf.

B.tr,.rd

Lonergan, Method. in

--Rosemary bury Press, SlH"rr"

Ruether, 1 9 7 4 1.

Faith

TheoLogy, pp.

and F?atricide

Kl[ng, Doee God Eciet?

(New York:

324 ff . 52tbid.,

101-124.

(New york:

The Sea-

Doublealay, 1980) , pp.

pp. 189-339.

-R-1W o l f g a n g

Leonhard, Eunoconnunisn, Challenge fon Eaot and tleat, trans. Mark Vecchio (New York: HoIt, Rinehart and Winston, 1978); c. R. Urban, ed., Eu"o-Communisn, fte Roots and Futune in Italy and Elseuhere (New Yorkt Universe Books, 1978). qd "Cf.

Langdon

cilkey,

Society

and

the

Sac?ed,

pp.

74-119.

Process theology is a prominent exemplification of this concerh to relate theology and modern science, as weII as the methodological orientation of those theologies influenced by Bernard Lonergan. --Cf. given

there

Daniel Maguire, op. cit., pp. 57-85 and references to the rrork as yet unpubtished of Dr. Dean Fowler.

56c"ta.d Radnitzsky, Contenporary Schoole of Metaecience ,, (eSteborg: akademif6rliget, 195'8), pi. re-faZ.

T,IETHOD

2g -'Cf.

PauI

cutsting. University

London:

(London:

Verso,

1975).

ed., Paracii.gms and ReuoLutio/ts 1980) , pp. Dame Press, of Notre

(Notre 2'l-74.

Dame.

Against

Feyerabend,

q - "nG a y y

Method

59Irnt. ancl th"e' Ct'iLi-:isn eds-, and AIan Musgrave, Lakatos Press, 1970)' Gr.ith of KnouLedge (London: Cambrj-dge University The trlethodology of Saientific pp. 39-48, 91-196; Imre Lakatos, C u r r i e and Gregory eds. John worrall Researcit Prog"ammes, pp. L93-222. (London: cambridge Press, 1978), University 60cf.

B"tnatd

rnsight,

Lonergan,

pp.

103-139.

6loo..Id bridge, 183-218

Bureauaracy A Theory of Public P. warwick, lCam1975), esp. pp. 3-36, Press, Mass.: Harvard University given there. and the references

62"i.hu.d (PhiladelPhia: and Action J. Bernstein , Praxis pp. L65-229i Kar}-otto Press, 1971), of Pennsylvania University trans. to Pragnaticisn, F?om Pragmatisn ApeL, Charles S. Peirce: (Amherst: Press' of Massachusetts University Krols John Michael 1981) . 63Cf. (New York: Simon and the Planners Rob".t coodman, After ?he Fi.nal Epidenic: Ruth Adams and Susan Cullen, 1972); schuster, Educational ir'ar (chicago: on Nuclear and Scientists Phgsicians Ametica 1981) ; David F. Noble, Science, for Nuclear Foundation CapitaLisn IechnoLogy and the Rise of Corporate Science, by Design: (New York: Alfred A. Knopf | \977', . 64E. and. Med.icine Men: Medicine Bror^n, RockefeLLer Ri.h.td (Berkeley: Press' of California university in Aneriea Capitalisn Beyond Reductionism: and J. R. smythies, Arthur Koestler 19i9); (Boston3 Beacon Press, Sciences in the Life Nea Perspectioes Btain The SeLf and fts 1969); Karl R. Popper and John C. Eccles, (New York: 1981) . International, Springer 65Purrl Denis savage trans. Freud and Philosophg, Ricoeur, 1970) ' pp. 419-551; (Ner"/Haven and London: Press, Yale University Jung, and the Search Ricoeur, and Psyche: M. Doran, Subject Robert (washington, Press of America, D.C.: University Foundations for (New York: The Free The DeniaL of Death Becker, 1977) ; Ernest Press, 1973). 66Jo""f and

Henley:

Bleicher, Routledge

Hermeneutics contenporar! 1980). & Kegan Paul,

(London,

Boston

67P",rl ed. and Eerneneutics and. the Human Sciences, Ricoeur, (London: Press, 1981), University Carnbridge John B. Thompson trans. Inaginatio!' The Analogical pp. 43-130, 222-273i D. Tracy, Pe. ' t h e o r i e H L u n g e t s t h e o t i e a n d 3fg- a Ol ; He lmut Peukelt ' I "il s s e n s c h a f pP. 17-54, (Frankfurt: 1978), suhrkamp, Theologie Fundanentale (Chicago: University Ihe Hunan Condition Hannah Arendt, 252-3L0; relative pp. For the references L75-325. 1958), Press, of Chicago refer to the notes and Bernstein, Maclntyre Horkheimer, to Becker, above. AA ""MacIntyre, 69olrrin Press,

W. 1980).

op.

cit.,

Gouldner,

pp. The

169-189.

Tdo

Marxisns

(Ner., York:

The

seabury

70cf. Today and socialism and Robin Hahnel, Albert tqi.h..l M. Lafllb' SoLida?it! 1981); south End Press, Tomo?Tou (Boston: given there, 132-133 and pp. 2-5 and references Victins, uith and Gibbons, given cf. also Michael "Insight there. references M e t h o d : EssdAs in Honor and in M. Lamb, ed.., C?eatiDity Emergence" (Milwaukee: f981), Marquette U. Press, Lonergan of Bernard PP.

CHRISTIANITY

29

529-542i Philip Mcshane, "Generalized Empirical Method and the pp. 543-572. Actual- Context of Economics," ibid., Tlttich."LAlbert and Robin Hahnel, Unorthodor Marzism (Boston: South End Press, 1978); John McMurtry, The Structure of Marxts WorLd-Vied (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Universj-ty Press, L978); Stanislaw Starski, CLass Struggle in CLassLess Poland (Boston: South End Press, 1982) ; Lawrence Weschler, Solidarity: Poland in the Season of its Passion (NewYork: Simon and Schuster, 1982) ; Rudolf Bahro, ?he Alternattoe in E a s t e r n E u r c p e , t r a n s . D a v i d F e r n b a c h ( L o n d o n: N L B , 1 9 7 8 ) ; K o f i Appiah-Kubi and Sergio Torres, eds., Afri.can Theologg En Route (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979); Basil Moore, ed., The Challenge of Btack Theology in South Afri.ca (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1973); Walbert Buhlnann, The Coning of the Third Chunch (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1975); Simon Leys, Chinese Shadoas lNew Y o r k : P e n g u i n B o o k s , 1 9 7 4 1; D a n i e l H . L e v i n e , e d . , C h u r c h e s a n d PoLi.tics in Latin Ane"ica (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1979); Sergio Torres and John Eagleson, eds., The Challenge of Basic Christian Connunitles (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1981) . 72Rob".to Mangabeira Unger, Knouled.ge The Free Press, 1975), pp. 236-295t Glenn on a Tragic Ideal lBaton Rouge: flections versity Press, 1980), pp. 148-199; Parker of Strange"s (New York: Crossroad, f981).

(New York: and Politics Tinder, ConnunitA: ReLouisiana State UniJ. Palmer, The Conpany

73J..." FaIlows, National Defense (New York: vintage Books, 1981); David Hollo\day, "War, MiJ.itarism and the Soviet State," in E. P. Thompson and Dan Smith, eds., P"otest and Suruioe (New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 19811, pp. 7O-lO7i Thomas A Shannon, ed., trlar or Peace? The Search for Nea Ansae"s luaryknoII: Orbis Books, f980). 74Fr"n"i= t{oore Lappe and Joseph Collins, Food First: Beyond (New York: Ballantine the Myth of Scarcity Books, 1977) r francis Moore Lappe, Joseph Collins and David Kinley, Aid as ?bstacle: Tuenty Questi,ons about out Fo"eign Aid and the Hungry (Institute for Food and Development Policy, 19751; Susan ceorge, HoD the )ther HaLf Dies (Montclair: Allanheld, Osmun and Co., l977lt Gerald and Patricia Mische, Iouard a Human World 2t,der (New York: Paulist Press, 1977); Joseph cremillion , Food/Energy and the Major Faiths (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1978). T5Derr.ris Gabor, fnnol)ationa: Scientific" Ieehnologieal and. Social (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970); F. pp. 253-120. Capra, op. cit., 76f,. S. Stavrianos, Globat Ri.ft: ?he fhird ,lo"Ld Conee of Age (New York: williarn llorrord and Co., 1981)i Loretta Schwartz-Nobel, Staruing in the Shadou of Plenty (New York: c. P. Putnam's Sons, 1 9 8 1 ). TTFerdinand tSnnies, Ceneineehaft und Gesellschaft lBerlinr 1887); Ton Bottomore and Robert Nisbet, eds., I HistorA of SocioLogical AnaLysie (Neu York: Basic Books, Inc., 1978), pp. 151, t9?-199, 440-442, 118-236. 7' -AD a v i d

Riesman,

with

Nathan

Glazer

and

Reuel

Denney,

fhe

Lonely C?oud lNew Haven and London: Yale University Press, 19501, H o r . r a r dS . B e c k e r , ) u t s i d e r s : Studiee in the SocioLogy of Deoiance (New York: The Free Press, 1963); Frank J. Donner, The Age of SurueilLance lVew York: Alfred A. Xnopf, 1980) . T9Jonathan R - -NI b i d . ,

Schell,

The Fate of

pp. l8l-231.

the Ea"th,

pp.

f73-174.

METHOD

30 81Macr.ty.e,

op. cit.,

pp.

190-209.

82Ma*

w " b e r , E . . c ) n a n uc n d S o c i e t y , v o l . I , p p . 2 4 - 2 6 , 3 3 9 , 212-265i Vol. II, pp. 956-997i Max Weber, 0n Charisna and Institution BuiLding (chicago: University of Chicago Press' 1968)' pp. 46-80. 83rt

pp. 48-65.

id.,

84N.rr"y

in M. Lamb, ed., and Reconciliation," Ring, "Alienation "Horizonal and Method, pp. 249-264i Mark D. l4oreIli, Creati|itA Diplomacy," ibnd., pp. 459-475 and references given in footnote 8 above . 8SB."""t"a ed., The Cr"eatioe Process (New York: The Ghiselin, The Act of Creation 1955); Arthur Koestler, New American Library, (New York: DelI Publishing Co., 1954) ; William Mathews, "Method in M. Larnb, ed., Credof Reality," and the Social Appropriation tiuity and Method, pp. 425-442. By community here I mean, of course, community. and not only instinctual intentional 86otto Nathan and Heinz Norden, ed,s., Einstein York: Avenel Books, 1981), pp. 509-640. 87B"trr.td Ae 'R" w

Lonergan, Method. in yet

have

to

appreciate

the

TheoLogy, pp. epochal

356-358.

significance

cf. ecumenical movement among the world religions. wetl Smith, Iouards a Horld Theology (Philadelphia: minster Press, 1981). 89R"f".

to

references

given

in

notes

on Peace (New

of

the

wilfred cantThe West-

10 and 11 above.

90Not"r,

Perrin, Jesus and the Language of the Kingdon (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976); Ernst KHsemann, Jesus Means FreeFortress Press, 1969). don (Philadelphia: 9lc,rrturo A Political cutierrez, "Freedom and Salvation: John Knox Press' and Change (Atlanta: Problem," in Liberation Ig77l , pp - 3-94; Martin Hengel, Chri s t and Poaer (Philadelphia : Eaith: A Case Fortress Press, 1977); Gerd Theissen, A Critical (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979) ; Alfred Braunfor Religion of th.aL, SaLuation and the Perfect Societg (Artrherst: University M a s s a c h u s e t t s P r e s s , 1 9 7 9 1. 92Et.r"t Troeltsch, ?he Social Ieaching of the Christian of Chicago Press' Churches, trans. olive wyon (Chicago: Utliversity 1981), vol. I, pp. 8-3793tbid.,

pp. 328-232.

94tbid., vol. rrr pp. 451-514, 579-651, 591-805. cf. also of ytee Congar (Milwaukee: Timothy MacDonald, The Ecclesiology 1982). Ph.D. dissertation, Marquelte University, 95Joh"rrn t 4 e L z, ? h e E n e r g e n t C h u n c h ( N e w Y o r k : c r o s s Baptist road, 1981). The renewed emphasis being given to local churches i-n The Catholie Theologi'cal SaeietA theologically is reflected '.forres of Aneri.ca Proeeedings, Vol. 35 (1981) . See also Sergio Comnunand John Eagleson, eds., The Challenge of Basic Christian 96Jonathar

schell,

?he Fate of

the Eat'th.

I,oNERGAT,IISEARLY USE OF ANALOGY A RESEARCHNOTE--WITH REFLECTIONS Frederick E. Crorre, S.J. Regis College, Toronto Eleven Lonergan ogy,

ago,

preaent,

in

the

need of

as well

as the

such a procedure.l

University asaert

a eimilar

if

we are

to

to

for

the

pitfalls

threaten

that Iater,

the

think

uEe of

past

in

the

anal-

terms

Euccess

at

a Laval

itaportance Trinity,

analogously

of

of

the

a paper

in

continuing

a Chri8tology

Bernard

historian,s

understanding

need to

construct

Theologg,

the

underatanding

he noted

analogy

to

Method in

years

Th.""

colloquiirm,

psychological

our

his

paragraphE

sotE

discussing

the of

years

devoted

of

the

and went on

consciousnegs questions

to meet the

of

tine.2 These sample

referencee

larly

and justifiably

guite

irmocent,

busy reader. tifonr

use of

of

hidden

of

his

in

itself

too

But

carry

analogy

in

that

usage.

the

and thus

data

But history

is

analogy thl.nkinE.

hae wider

challenge

fron

My historical the

txo

perhapa,

Uy orn

out

the

will

task

doctoral

pasaagea

which

of

with

assemble j.n

noted

as a key to $ho Iabor thinking

with

bit

Lonergan's

a fen

to

of

use

his

Btyle

accept

the

has presented. reflections

topic.

which

analogy

to

writings,

aamples

that

his

then

this

diaaertation deal

those

concl.ude

significance

as a study

an interesting

is

serving for

a wealth

career.

than

opinion

a

understanding

previous the

seem

and mul-

rfith

our

therefore,

his

regu-

pause to

new journal, for

iuplications,

sketch

practl,cal

enrlch

this

of

are

give

writings,

to

Lonergan.s

period

that

Lonergan,'

an extensive

early

to

and aa a directive

and carry

of

be nined

rnore here,

lexicography?

of

In

freight

perspective

a better

there

or

of

1940,

to

seemed worthwhile,

t}re tlethod. and post-rYethod

on the

and traditional

Lonergan.E

on analogy

provide

works "later

and as a contributLon

sonE of

of

in the

the

night

It

analogy

those

fanriliar

they

neaning

later

to

called

in

Lonergan

conpleted

eorne detail.

in

Aguinas

is shown to have ueed the analogy of Aristotle.s physical motion (nption in the trangitl,ve sense of noving an object) to understand the divine pretrction by which the sinner ia converted and juetlfied.3 And there is developed, with a more personal input, the

generalized

tivity: sets

on the forththe

Creator

and that

dependence

theorem analogy

of of

"proxiraate" of

on God of

the the

divine

operation

a srrord.sman's analogy

for (the

creature pnincipTe

31

of

in

all

created

use of

his

sword,

acLonergan

the caugation of the rretncrte" analogy being operation

as opposed

the to

32

}TETHOD

that

of

the operation

ticular

anal.ogies at

discussion special of

this

analogies

li-e,

in

such a thematic

for

their

for

of

exposition

the

Trinity.

tional,

remarks on the

Lonergan's

the

und.erstanding

for

present

purposes, as it

intelligence of ial

proper

the

things, in

lead

of

personal

only

stated

his

insight

ovrn manner,

career,

it the

being

of

but

"cannot

particular

necessitates of

versity

to

the

vances

analogy,

judgment, is

the

"natural

insight

is

is

content

is

truth

the

an analogy of

is

key importance

in

"the the

forth

Aristo-

matter

of

being:

of

proportion, terms

by which

through

understanding

is

the the

Also

to

inteltj.gibly analogy

for

and

the process

of

the

.

of

giving

is

tra-

meaning

these

ad-

the

Trinity,

to

articles

ens and esse,

proceeding

.

proPortion

and concept in

.

the di-

.

human consciousness

be noted

an analogy

.

whatever

and .

feature,

characteristic

.

"the

understanding,"

intelligibility

identity

.

sense."8

concept of

in

through-

specifically

of

act

. makes the

here

between essence and existence

and being.9

is

the the

is

be

could be I'what is known

to natural

process

"As there

there of

of .

.

the

and "the

expressing

Thus,

it

position

. could

.

be operative

will

the object of

.

nature

set

form is

Leads to

similarity

experience

remark:

to

an effect

but

. its

Again,

that

proportion

The proportion

fron

change

nanely,

content.

enough,

ditional

of

be analogous,"

the the

different."

subject analogy."

theory

and Loner-

matter

an Aristotelian

.

mater-

dynamic

That

of

a notion

direction

The other

of

analogy

.

of

"quiddity" process of on analogy.

And so we have,

of

that of

as the object concept

the

recognition

inagined.'

a position

anal-

dynamism of

discovery

ultimate to

the

use of

the

the

and truth, in

and to

more inportant

for

lay

in-

tradi-

theology

far

around the

lvhat is

for us to

to

But,

their

analogy

are obviously

they

unfolding

the

into

takes

by recourse

analogy,"

telian

in

indirectly."

Lonergan's

being

and for

substantially

the]t

nor quantum nor quale

by intellect out

role,

"the

quid

neither

basis

do show

remembered

psychological

analogy

of

intelligence

and fateful

on proportion:

if

developed

two directions

One direction gan's

of

and the

consciousness, will

the

heads for

object

heading

rnystery.o

dealt

later

theory

cognitional

relation is

questions

a fe$t years

personal,

theory

The content

reference.

the Thomist

latter

divine

of

cognitional

the

of

very

or any

it.

They are especially

Thomist

Under the

for

no thematic

is

general,

using

theological

follovred

interest.t

portant

ogy:

that

in par-

interest

there

in

way of

my terms of

and revitalization

recovery

but

analogy

particular

outside

Th.e Derbun articles just

of

Lonergan's

and the

course,

of

Such extensive revealing,

date

early

significance

the

with

itself).4 perhaps

is

so also

n"t. "10 Thit since

Being

33

ANAI,oGY is

a divine

as an act

attribute of

and,

as the

But,

restricting

how this cept

the

attacheE

Three,

his

personal

ig

in

shifting act

objectifying

analogy

its

to

preaent

of

from

the

note con-

objectified

ltself,

expressing

in

dynamic

not

relevant

Son

Trinlty.

I merely

the

understanding,

foundations

to

the

purposes,

focua

the

of

Eot,

Fatherta

the

relation

second person

the to

discuasl,on

remark,

to

the

grounda

tsord,

uttered

but

corrnon to

utterance,

hunan congcious-

ness. Ineight, over

the

of

"notion ent of

in

he saya,

for

could

say it the of

chapter

12 but

that

is

sider

it

in

of

tion

the

its

about Further of

use in

thia

to

notion

to

there

analogy,'

Ipnergan

classical

heurlgtic rt

and to tion it

but,

meaning

vary-

another.

one

for

one desire

the

one could

or,

say it

and goes beyond what

depending

i8

atrictly,

a

iB the

of

rhole

concePt

this

you con-

potential

as

one aska the

guet-

in if

other

one can forn

on wtrether

knoe or

aa notion,

ie

its

then

que3tion

the

tcrr,

ln

knovledge appllcatl.on

callg

itl,

connon

recognizing

ig

analogy,

in

of

sense that

But

ln

a Dore

of

analogy

rhich

under

gcience

ln

('a

lo.ca

reference

to

the

it.

exploits situationa

fact

repeated rurely etody.ls

rlth

that

the

ulll

etabe re-

such a u!e, basic

"sinilars

differ,

our

use conmon eense il

As ahrays, that

a

in

headingr

legitinating

untlerstandLng:

than

protractdd

coqrared

a pattern

in

la har

varl,oua

are

grounds

there wtrich

sâ‚Źarchlng

of

the

nore analogy

to

inrtance to

lnherent

ter:ar

reference

ertrrpolation,

e nw

thcre

hardly

can receive

llttle

1r acknorledged.ll the

an early

dangera

l.B given

understoodt"

being

atructurea

is

make of

the

it

of

is

Finally, to

He

same

to

r.onergan,

to

but,

anlogou!

Secondly,

prone

the

, and one can say of

deeire

there

though

context

be related

peated.

with the

(indeed,

being'

La Ineight

Fl,rst,

cod,

tistical.l6

poaition

accordingly.

rith

underpins

analogousr

of

concept

application

univocal,

interpret

conceptsi

naterl,al

here.

notion

of

a8 the

all

inher-

the

and lonergan'a

univocal,

of

being

rith

and applLcation.

neaning

mention

both

as I

or

itself

productive

contrast

and revised

contentsi

such a concept?f

univocal

in

written

raa

19s3.11 the

of

anticipation

is

is

here,

1919 to

penetratea or, one all other contentsi 'for regards concePta, this dietinction

being

that i:, the 'notion

concept it

of

it

other degire

neither,

is

from

analogoua,

or

that

all

that

notion

contenta.'l3

being

from one field

know underpins

while

of

applications,

angrer,

analogous,

aa the

developed

is

notion

this

yeara,

four

much elaboratedrl2

being

syatematically

could to

of

all

in

revigiona

next

know and ag set

to

now very

is

analogy

asks whether ing

the

understood

desire

being,

meaning

of

being,"

the

on the

for

except

course

are

without adds also

explanasinilarly

formulating the

34

METHOD

j-nsights

particuLar for

suspicion

relevant

to

the critical

in

we have been examining turn

to more of

shortly

giving

.rot without

each,17

grounds

thinker.lS major

of

lrorks

But at

then.

Lonergan and will point

this

there

re-

intervene

on analogy little essays, each wj-th a wealth of detail -.rir to surnmarize, One is a review article on Johannes I will B e u m e r' s T h eo l o g i e a L s GL a u be n s u e r s t L . n d n i s , a b o o k t h a t d e a l t a t (now vatican I) length with the position of the vatican Council three

which

rday we may understand

on the through of

analogies

the

mystery

with

and continues his

to is

atudents

ference

to

focus

But the

of

understanding

ology,

a focus

in

is

Lonergan adding

that

There

arriving

thoughtas

of

to

and there ditatioe to

apprehend being The third

analogy

of

in

of

and scientific

definition

that to

into

to unpo-

the

(rtith

an ac-

and modern,

of

context

of

that

duality)

,

between ene quidhis

created

aPprehend

essence is being

is

and imperfectly.

is

which

a paper

for

the

Lonergan draws a phrase

thought.23

though

Thomas,

(and then

lejection

bwt- to

the

The

based on Platonist

medieval

the

st.

of

universals

Fourth

Inter-

"a protracted

lde found

ln

Th"

Insightl 'con-

"o^p.tison fron to Prescind entirely For example, "the structures."

to verification

judgment,"

quae

and

apprehend God in

similarity

enter

hypothesis

analogy is

the

most exten-

the question

difference

(an echo of

on a structural

the materials relation

to

the

be noted

to

congress,

proportion"

of

God in

of

his

rendering relate

thinkers,

analogously

only

esaay

Thomlst

betrdeen Thomist centrates

of

ll.im quidditati{e,

apprehend

national

talk

for

under the

the whole question.

the

the-

. Analogiae conaec-

.

supposes duality

knowledge various

and ens analogice:

to

to

subsistent

an exporition

is

to

anal-

of

and human intellect,

knov then) , there

that

when they

experience

at

,

probably

verbatim

reference

difficulty

the

of

emphasis

only

principle

date

an alnbst

,

what is

angelic,

ie

value

tasks

. Analogi.ae conseetaria

.

to

Intelligence

siting Platonic

.

account

characteristic

the

1954-1955.21 H".",

divine,