Can the West Be Converted?: Towards a Contextual Theology for the West 9781793633811, 9781793633828, 1793633819

Citation preview

Can the West Be Converted?

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 1

25-09-2021 09:25:44

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 2

25-09-2021 09:25:44

Can the West Be Converted? Towards a Contextual Theology for the West

Jean-Georges Gantenbein Translated by Jacob Marques Rollison Afterword by Jean-François Zorn

LEXINGTON BOOKS

Lanham • Boulder • New York • London

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 3

25-09-2021 09:25:44

Published by Lexington Books An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 www​.rowman​.com 86-90 Paul Street, London EC2A 4NE Copyright © 2021 by Jean-Georges Gantenbein All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Gantenbein, Jean-Georges, author. | Marques Rollison, Jacob, translator. Title: Can the West be converted? : towards a contextual theology for the West / Jean-Georges Gantenbein ; translated by Jacob Marques Rollison ; afterword by Jean-François Zorn. Other titles: Mission en Europe. English ; Originally published as Mission en EuropeUne étude missiologique pour le XXIe siècle in 2016 by Aschendorff Verlag GmbH & Co. KG Münster. Description: Lanham : Lexington Books, [2021] | The present book, a revised and condensed version of a scholarly thesis defended at the University of Strasbourg in 2010, adapted in 2016 for francophone readers [as Mission en Europe : une étude missiologique pour le XXIe siècle] and here for an anglophone audience—Pref. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “Rather than considering contemporary culture in light of secularization, much of the Western Church operates with a degree of nostalgia. This book constitutes a decisive missiological intervention calling for renewed appraisal of contemporary Christian proclamation”— Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2021039580 | ISBN 9781793633811 (hardback) | ISBN 9781793633828 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Missions—Theory—History—21st century. | Evangelistic work. | Christianity and culture. Classification: LCC BV2063 .G3313 2021 | DDC 266.001—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021039580 ∞ ™ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 4

25-09-2021 09:25:45

Contents

List of Figures

vii

Preface ix 1 Methodological Criteria

1

2 The Current “Religious” Context

35

3 Contextual Characteristics

103

4 Theological Criteria

187

5 A Contextual Theology for Europe

253

6 Conclusion and Prospects

329

Afterword 339 Postface 351 Bibliography 355 Index 381

v

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 5

25-09-2021 09:25:45

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 6

25-09-2021 09:25:45

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 “Mission” Terminology 7 Figure 1.2 The Correlational Model of Practical Theology According to Gagnebin 25 Figure 1.3 The Correlational Model of Missiology, Enriched by Ratzmann’s Classification of “Models of Theoretical Approach” in Practical Theology 25 Figure 1.4 The Correlation Model in Missiology Enriched by Ratzmann’s Classification of “Models of Theoretical Approach” in Practical Theology, Adapted to the Present Book 26 Figure 2.1 Typology of “Believing without Belonging” According to Grace Davie 67 Figure 3.1 Synthesis of Seventeen Contextual Criteria into Five Groups 174 Figure 4.1 Fourteen Theological Criteria Combined into Eight Primary Groups 244 Figure 5.1 A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis 260 Figure 5.2 Biblical Models Corresponding to the First Missiological Line 262 Figure 5.3 Centripetal Missiological Model Corresponding to the First Missiological Line 264 Figure 5.4 A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God 265 Figure 5.5 Biblical Model Corresponding to the Second Missiological Line 266 Figure 5.6 Centrifugal Missiological Model Corresponding to the Second Missiological Line 267 vii

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 7

25-09-2021 09:25:45

viii

List of Figures

Figure 5.7 A Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology Figure 5.8 Biblical Model Corresponding to Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology Figure 5.9 Our Simplified Contextual Model Figure 6.1 Our Ideal-Type Contextual Model

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 8

268 311 318 335

25-09-2021 09:25:45

Preface

κηρύσσων τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ διδάσκων τὰ περὶ τοῦ κυρίου Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ πάσης παρρησίας ἀκωλύτως. [he] proclaim[ed] the kingdom of God and [taught] about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance. —Acts 28:31 (NRSV)

In 1987, Lesslie Newbigin asked, “Can the West be Converted?” This interrogation into the necessary work of creating a missiology for the Western context has lost neither its acuity nor its urgency. The present book—a revised and condensed version of a scholarly thesis defended at the University of Strasbourg in 2010, adapted in 2016 for francophone readers and here for an anglophone audience—probes the contemporary relevance of this question, asking what responding to it might involve. This book aims to define criteria indispensable to a missiology for the Western context. While it focuses primarily on European countries, a common heritage and increasing globalization mean that it is of interest to the West more broadly. It is an interdisciplinary endeavor, at once theological (more precisely, a work of missiological contextualization) and sociological (relying on existing studies in the sociology of religions), drawing on academic literature written in French, German, and English. I establish a correlation between cultural-religious characteristics of contemporary Europe and corresponding theological affirmations, between contextual and theological criteria. I thus develop a method of critical contextualization of relative discontinuity, in relation to the models of Jean-François Zorn and Paul Hiebert. This research results in a new ideal type model of contextualization, and a reflection on the major theological ix

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 9

25-09-2021 09:25:45

x

Preface

implications of this model. My approach to a contextual theology for Europe and the West constitutes a rare scholarly and scientific approach to this subject. Lesslie Newbigin, David Bosch, and later Friedemann Walldorf opened this field of research into a contextual theology for the Western context, in an era in which the Global South produced admirable examples of this kind of theology. Western theologians of the time could not imagine the application of contextualizing methods for and in their own countries. Missiology was still seen as an exotic branch of theology primarily concerned with the first proclamation of the Gospel in Asian, African, and South American contexts. The process of secularization has continued to expand and the consequences of the nominalization of Christianity in the West are now visible everywhere. A proclamation of the Good News in Europe today would hardly constitute its first presentation. But Christians today are realizing that it is no longer possible to communicate the Gospel in the same way as those who have preceded us, hence my recourse to the method of contextualization. It offers a more radical approach than existing concepts in practical theology, which most often build upon the historical fact of Christianity’s extended presence in Europe. This fact was then transformed into a rarely questioned informal theological prerequisite: the Church in Europe was always primary, and “mission” was one among many other Church tasks. A new contextualization of the Gospel interrogates this order and allows for its overturning: the Church becomes a function of mission. This change in the order of priority and importance is crucial. It rests on a theology of the Mission of God.1 This monograph is written in the form a synthetic essay. I am perfectly aware of its limits, as I venture into certain domains which are not my specialty. But this is how missiology functions. It is interdisciplinary by nature, mobilizing the various theological and missiological disciplines as well as the social sciences, nurturing a rootedness of the Gospel within a particular culture. I have surveyed existing preliminary works on this subject and raised fundamental questions about mission for the Western context. My essay sketches the limits of this field of research so vital for Churches, and also for Western theology. Various practitioners and missiologists are encouraged to confront my model with different European (and more broadly, Western) contexts, to adapt it and render it more pertinent. It is clear that such a wideranging essay on contextualization for the Western context should content itself with the most basic and broad brushstrokes. I have opted for this sketch instead of a detailed study of a precise context because such global studies are presently quite rare. I would like to thank my translator, Dr. Jacob Marques Rollison, for his quality translation and adaptation. His work has allowed for several clarifications of my work in its original French. This work of translation was funded

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 10

25-09-2021 09:25:45

xi

Preface

by Mr. Friedhelm Kuhlmann, whom I thank for his act of generosity. I would also like to thank Lexington Books for their willingness to take on my project. The open end of Acts poses a problem to exegetes.2 Those who adopt a narrative approach see here a deliberate decision by Luke to inscribe the pursuit of the proclamation of the Kingdom of God “without hindrance” into the very style of this finale. This would not be a conclusion, but the transmission of a mission to the readers of this book. In this sense, the proclamation of the Kingdom is situated in a line of continuity which continues even after Luke’s diptych ends. I cannot evaluate the exegetical value of this approach. But the application of the continued proclamation of the Gospel is an historical fact. The Gospel has made its way from the apostle’s house in Rome to reach the five continents of this earth. If today we have turned a page in the history of Christianity, if numerous dark clouds hang over Western Churches, we can nevertheless cling to this end of Acts as an affirmation that the Lordship of God will continue to advance—even in the West. My hope is that this work will encourage reflection and discussion on evangelization in the West among Christians and clergy members, as well as among theologians, philosophers, and missiologists in the West and elsewhere. I dedicate this monograph to our sons Nicolas and Samuel and to our daughter-in-law Priscille. Jean-Georges Gantenbein Mulhouse, Epiphany 2021

NOTES 1. See our epistemological discussion on pages 29–34. 2. See our discussion on 360–361.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 11

25-09-2021 09:25:45

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 12

25-09-2021 09:25:45

Chapter 1

Methodological Criteria

INTRODUCTION “What, indeed, will contextualization of the gospel in the West involve and look like? I submit that we do not really know. That makes it all the more necessary to reflect on this issue with the utmost urgency.”1 This remark from celebrated missiologist David J. Bosch is the informal will and testament which he bequeathed to the following generation. In his exposé Believing in the Future: Towards a Missiology of Western Culture, his last published work, Bosch saw in the development of a missiology for the Western world a missiological priority for his time. His sudden death in 1992 left this task unaccomplished, but his project is no less urgent. Since his death, no new missiological approaches for the global Western context have emerged.2 “Contextualization” or “inculturation” are missiological notions consciously applied on all continents outside of the western hemisphere.3 Contextual theologies today are legion, having profusely multiplied since their appearance in 1970.4 Of particular interest to Western theologians, these theologies are read with no little fascination. But to embark on a contextual theology for the West on these grounds is another matter.5 The several existing studies for specific Western contexts are too few in number.6 We have enumerated the reasons for the absence of such studies in an earlier work; these reasons are worth recalling briefly.7 The term “mission,” its content, and missiology as a whole have been removed (whether consciously or unconsciously) from ecclesial, theological, and scholarly discourse; the clear distinction between theology and missiology in the West has meant that theologians easily forget the missionary origin of New Testament writings: consequently, theology has lost its eminently missionary character; missiology’s marginalization in the university landscape prevented the construction 1

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 1

25-09-2021 09:25:46

2

Chapter 1

of missiological competence among theologians; the latter are thus rarely proficient at such contextualization. Bruno Chenu recalls that contextual theologies originate in a climate of claims made against “western” theology.8 This ideological tension did not favor the emergence of formal contextual theologies in the West (though practitioners in churches have always operated with a more or less conscious “contextual” practice, which does not necessarily materialize as a formal missiology). Non-Western theologies are not built from the top-down, but from the bottom-up—that is, with a contextual concern formulated in common language. These theologies of the “genitive” tend to be missiological theologies. Consequently, they are theologies in movement, moving from theo to mission and ending up as “theo-missiologies.” All these factors are historically situated in the modern and contemporary period. There are certainly other subjacent reasons which have laid the foundations for an abstract and speculative conception of theology (in the Aristotelian and Thomist lineage) which employs a religious and ontological vocabulary minimally informed by pastoral needs. Yet for Martin Luther, for example, theology ought to be existential, thus practical.9 By contrast, the speculative tradition of Western theology was poorly equipped for its encounter with the philosophies of the Enlightenment. As a consequence of the separation of faith and reason which marked the Enlightenment era, secularization “locked” theology in a speculative ivory tower, disqualifying it for thinking reality. Three missiologists have nevertheless prepared the groundwork for a missiology for the Western context: Lesslie Newbigin in the second half of the 1980s, David J. Bosch at the beginning of the 1990s, and Friedemann Walldorf at the turn of the millennium.10 All three recognized the urgency of this enterprise, but their reflections never left the preparatory stages, offering only summary propositions. None of their respective principal works constitute more than fifty pages. Walldorf’s is the most recent contribution, offering an analysis of various church declarations (from the Roman Catholic Church, the Conference of European Churches, and the European Committee of the Lausanne Movement) concerning their theologies of mission. While legitimate, his choice impedes a more original approach—that is, a correlation between biblical exegesis and the European religious context.11 The present study adopts this latter approach. These three missiologists were not the only ones concerned to develop a missiology of the Western context. In a promising initiative begun in Paris in January 1992, American Mennonite missiologist Wilbert R. Shenk founded an ecumenical workgroup on the “Missiology of Western Culture,” bringing together twenty missiologists and theologians for interdisciplinary work. An initial report by David J. Bosch (cited above) described the contemporary status of this field of research. The group addressed this considerable challenge

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 2

25-09-2021 09:25:46

Methodological Criteria

3

by working in seven subgroups, examining art, ecclesiology, epistemology, social structures and systems, history, the individual, and health and healing. Unfortunately, after a final consultation in September 1997 in Marriottsville in the United States, the project was prematurely terminated in 1997 due to material problems. No similar initiative has taken up this challenge for the Western context since the group’s dissolution.12 OBJECTIVE OF THE PRESENT WORK Our objective is thus to develop a general missiology for the European culture which might be adapted to the West more broadly, hoping to remedy the absence of general works on the subject described above. We are conscious of the risks incurred in such an undertaking. The very notion of contextualization points back to particularism, while the dynamic unleashed by New Testament missions tends toward universalism. Our general aim risks creating tension with the goal of a contextual missiology, which aims to focus on a precise situation. This method thus entails considerable pitfalls. To seek to generalize differing European religious contexts implies attenuating them, sketching them in a pallid and lifeless profile. This would completely undermine this work’s goal; why, then, employ this method? Despite these concerns, there are several advantages beyond the normal tension between (scriptural) text and (cultural) context inherent in any contextual study, whether general or specific: 1) A general overview follows a different pedagogical logic. Common observations are a starting point for a process leading the researcher toward each context’s particularities. 2) Similar cultural characteristics found in the different contexts observed allow for hypotheses common to the European context as a whole, and perhaps the West more broadly. We can thus paint a picture of the general cultural context which still allows for differentiation according to particular places. 3) Focusing on a smaller cultural entity greatly limits the number of parties interested in a given study. It is worth asking if such scientific effort is justifiable in each case, even if it might stimulate other similar studies. Therefore, while holding to our general method, we hope for further regional and local studies across the West. Our choice is thus motivated by a European focus; our study cannot encompass the entire Western cultural era. We will limit ourselves to European countries, in hopes that what is discovered will permit further study and perhaps commonality with the West more broadly.13

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 3

25-09-2021 09:25:46

4

Chapter 1

INTERCULTURAL AND ECUMENICAL PERSPECTIVE Our study favors an intercultural approach. We analyze four countries each representing a larger “religious” space. Synthesizing the results allows us to sketch the contours of “religious” phenomena in Europe in chapter 2. We will complete this analysis in following chapters with cultural characteristics and contextual criteria for a missiology for Europe. Our work inhabits what might be called an ecumenical perspective, if we give this term the following three significations14: 1) The epistemological basis of our work is such that we do not hold to any confessional viewpoint which does not first pass through theological critique. As absolute objectivity is impossible, we nevertheless seek to align ourselves with scriptural teaching as much as possible. Our first use of the term “ecumenical” thus denotes a demand for intellectual honesty and theological truthfulness, and a primacy of Scripture over confessional documents. 2) Second, “ecumenical” refers to a geographical region, the oikoumenê as the geographical space of the catholicity of the universal church. For this work, this space is nevertheless limited to the European continent. 3) Finally, the third signification concerns the aim of this book. This book aims to address all local, regional, and national churches in their historical garments—that is, the different Christian confessions and denominations in Europe—without constructing an explicit confessional missiology. We need not evoke here the close relation between the missionary movement and the contemporary ecumenical movement. DEFINING THE TERMS Evangelization and Mission We must distinguish the contemporary use of the terms “evangelization” and “mission” from their original usage in the New Testament.15 That these expressions appeared in different periods highlights their divergent meanings and calls for distinguishing the two notions and their respective applications. They have been schematically distinguished as follows: mission corresponds to the first proclamation of the Gospel to persons who have never heard it, and evangelization corresponds to its proclamation among already-Christianized (Western) populations. Nevertheless, this distinction is not impervious to exegetical analysis. 1) The term evangelization derives from the Greek euangelizô, “to evangelize.” It concerns the proclamation of the Gospel, which is the narration

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 4

25-09-2021 09:25:46

Methodological Criteria

5

of the account of the life, passion, death, resurrection, and glory of the Son of God. The Gospel here is to be taken in its absolute sense, whence the “Good News” (euangelion). This content also corresponds to the titles of its four “containers,” the four gospels. Mark introduces his Gospel with this programmatic expression (Mk 1:1). Jesus of Nazareth had chosen this expression for the inauguration of his public ministry by directly linking it with another fundamental notion of biblical theology, the kingdom of God. The Gospel created the foundation and, through the action of God, the possibility of a truly changed life, that is, conversion (Mk 1:15). The language of the Gospel “proclaimed to the poor” (cf. Is 61:1) marks the identity of the Messiah regarding his origin (Lk 4:18) and in response to questions from the one who preceded him (Lk 7:22). The universal scope of the Gospel reaches a climax when the master himself sends out his disciples before going to join his Father, thus definitively overflowing his message’s original intended audience (Mk 16:15). The Acts of the Apostles and Paul’s writings employ the term “Good News” on several occasions, showing that the notion had already been integrally assimilated to the person and message of Jesus Christ. 2) The term mission has no direct equivalent in Hebrew or Greek. The Greek word apostolê, designating the New Testament ministry of the apostle (Acts 1:25), comes closest to this expression. The verbs pempô and apostellô can be used in a specifically religious sense to designate the sending of Jesus Christ by the Father and of the disciples by Jesus. Jesus understood himself as sent to the lost sheep of Israel (Matt. 15:24). His ministry took on an eminently missionary character oriented toward the eschatological gathering of the people of God. This gathering was already visible during Jesus’s earthly ministry, foreshadowed by the call of the twelve apostles, their new vocation as fishers of men (Mk 1:17), their “delegation” as missionaries by their master and their being equipped with Jesus’ authority (Matt. 10:1–42). The witness of the resurrected one installs the disciples’ “provisory” mission more durably through the promise of the Holy Spirit, and the expanded assignment of this task beyond the historical twelve apostles to all disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. The book of Acts is the chief source concerning the beginnings of apostolic mission. The epistles are in large part direct or indirect accounts of intense missionary activity. 3) Taken together, mission and evangelization form a fundamental notion of the New Testament. It is illegitimate to separate them since they designate one reality: the extension of the reign of God under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the collaboration of human agents in this sending. We could thus say that evangelization encompasses the content and communication of the message of the Good News, while mission

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 5

25-09-2021 09:25:46

6

Chapter 1

defines the dynamic character of a common theological notion: God sets himself in motion to save humanity. While evangelization is an activity of the church, mission describes a notion which surpasses the framework of the church, finding its origin in the person of God himself. That the two terms are treated as synonyms in theological literature and church documents is understandable if their authors refer to this common and fundamental biblical notion.16 4) We must give a working definition of mission for this book. It is indispensable due to the diversity of existing propositions and the difficulty encountered in trying to harmonize them. We must know on what foundation this work is built.17 The temporal aspect of mission designates the chronos between Christ’s resurrection and his return in glory (Acts 1:6–11). Mission is both the present sign of the nascent kingdom of God and the premise of its accomplished future reign. This reign is growing visibly or invisibly through the proclamation of Christ in words and deeds under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as revealed in the Gospel. The proclamation of the “Good News” breaks into the various places of human life in which this liberating message is not yet known, so that men and women would be placed in the presence of the living and true God, his lordship, and his work of salvation. Illuminated by the Holy Spirit, the human being can grasp the free gift of the Gospel in this kairos. He or she will confirm the conversion experience through the obedience of faith (Rom 1:5, 15:18) visibly in their identification with Christ through baptism.18 Mission overflows the goal of individual conversion because God gathers his own around his word in local communities, that is, churches. The church is the place where believers are edified, where the members of the body of Christ are equipped. Then they can influence the contexts in which they live and take full responsibility for evangelization in a global perspective. The church is first and foremost the goal of a mission. But once the new community is born, it transforms into a tool and base for further sending; it is not oriented toward an existence in isolation. To conclude, mission is a movement of God toward humanity originating in the person of God himself and his universally salvific will. This movement pulls the Son out of the glory of God. In obedience to the divine “mission,” he accomplishes the salvation of the world on the cross at Golgotha. Human missionaries emerge in Christ’s wake, who never surpass their master, knowing themselves to be fully dependent upon him.19 “Mission,” “mission,” and “missions” This book distinguishes the four notions of “Mission,” “missio Dei,” “mission,” and “missions,” moving from the most global and overarching term to

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 6

25-09-2021 09:25:47

7

Methodological Criteria

the most particular. It begins with the source of missions, God, and ends with human activity. Missiologists adopted the formula missio Dei in the 1950s to indicate God as the origin of mission.20 In this sense, God is the subject of mission. God alone conceived of mission to establish his reign; God is the one who sends on mission. This discovery implied a fundamental change in the understanding of mission, which is henceforth anchored in the trinitarian God. Before the 1952 reunion of the Conseil international des missions (CIM) in Willingen, Germany, missio Dei referred to the sending of Jesus Christ by the Father and of the Holy Spirit by the Son and the Father (“Mission”). The sending of disciples into the world by the three persons of the trinity was added to this definition after Willingen. Since this conference, the sending of the Son, of the Holy Spirit, and of the church constitute the new, broader definition of missio Dei. By contrast, in this book we use “mission” to designate the sending of the church in the broad sense of the term, and in light of its general vocation. Our definition of “mission” thus corresponds to the mission Ecclesiae. We thus separate the missio Dei (in its broad, post-Willingen usage) into two movements coming from the same “missionary” God to bring out the qualitative contrast between the “Mission” of the Son and the Holy Spirit and the “mission” of the church. The church partakes in the salvific proclamation of God, but it is not the subject, origin, or ultimate object of mission. She is the bearer of the evangelical message, a means in the hands of the “missionary” God. Ecclesiocentric conceptions must yield to a theocentric foundation for mission.21 The final term, missions, represents all of the churches’ missionary activities, the missiones Ecclesiae, the historical and human undertaking of mission. To conclude, the four notions employed in this book are presented in the schema below (see figure 1.1). 

Theological Content The sending of the Son and the Spirit The sending of the Son, Spirit, and Church The sending of the Church Missionary activities of the Church

Theological and Missiological Nomenclature

Designation in this book

missio Dei in the strict sense, pre-1952

"Mission"

missio Dei in the broad sense, post-1952 missio Ecclesiae

"missio Dei" "mission"

missiones Ecclesiae

"missions"

Figure 1.1  “Mission” Terminology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 7

25-09-2021 09:25:48

8

Chapter 1

Internal vs. External Mission The historical distinction between mission and evangelization which appeared in the nineteenth century (which we have refuted above) finds its corollary in the binomial “internal mission/external mission.” These expressions were commonly used after the birth of “internal mission,” which was institutionally founded in 1848 by a pastor in Wichern, Germany with the goal of re-Christianizing the population. The overarching notion of mission was thereby divided into “external mission,” which targeted far-off “pagans,” and “internal mission,” an evangelization movement among European peoples already-Christianized in the past. (In the francophone context, internal mission also appears under the terms “société évangélique,” “mission populaire,” and “mission urbaine.”22) This historical evolution in the second half of the twentieth century is thus marked by a slippage in meaning from mission/evangelization to “external mission/ internal mission.” But neither distinction is satisfactory today since both are presumed to be interchangeable. Missiology The theological discipline of “mission science” was born from the practice of Christian mission in the nineteenth century.23 Its founders wanted to submit actual missionary work to critical theological analysis. Their efforts resulted in the creation of the first chair of missiology at the Protestant faculty in Halle, Germany, in 1908.24 Gustav Warneck was its first occupant, thus becoming the father of modern missiology.25 The discipline has since expanded and is no longer exclusively the study of applied mission. But only rarely has it found an emancipated place within the classic disciplinary “canon” of theology. It is generally classified as practical theology, or integrated into other disciplines, or even completely removed from theological teaching.26 Missiology is conceived as scholarly reflection on (Christian) mission. It calls on other theological disciplines such as biblical exegesis and systematic theology, as well as church history and practical theology. It studies its object from theological, historical, and empirical viewpoints. It adopts descriptive, prescriptive, deductive, and inductive methods. It maintains close links with religious studies, sociology of religions, anthropology, and ethnology. Missiology for the Western/European Culture We have taken up the task of constructing a missiology for the European culture, with hopes that it might prove useful in developing missiology for the West more broadly. But we might also formulate a missiology of the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 8

25-09-2021 09:25:48

Methodological Criteria

9

European culture. This seemingly trivial difference nevertheless demands clarification.27 A missiology of the European culture suggests a model aimed at re-Christianization. This option exists, but its theological legitimacy and missiological pertinence for the late modern context requires critical examination. This contextualization model will assign particular importance to the “culture” pole in relation to the “Gospel” pole. We might juxtapose it with certain Roman Catholic theologies: a theology of redemption or assumption of culture. These models argue for the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit even before the Gospel’s proclamation in a culture. They likewise imply a religion and its particular history, automatically augmenting the intrinsic theological value of these three latter elements. A missiology of the European culture might also be juxtaposed with the missiological model of inculturation—a modus operandi which produces theologies similar to the Roman Catholic theologies mentioned above: theologies of accomplishment or participation grounded in the New Testament doctrine of the incarnation of the Son of God among men. As the initial target of missionary efforts, a particular culture is thus at least partially transformed into the subject of mission. A missiology for the European culture has the advantage of greater distance between “ospel” and “culture.” It maintains the priority of Scripture over context, ensuring a more conflictual and prophetic (as opposed to consensual) relation between context and divine revelation.28 This is how we will approach the notion of contextualization. Our choice implies several postulates which will be examined throughout this book.29

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES Theology and the Humanities “The function of science is to gain knowledge that is open to testing.”30 This definition also applies to theology as a scientific discipline. Theology does not seek to occupy a particular place among the humanities, nor even among the sciences at all. What differentiates theology from other disciplines—and what, despite everything, gives theology a particular place in the academic landscape—is the object of its research: the Christian faith. Every scientific enterprise implies that the methods of a science must be adapted to its field of study. The originality of the discipline of theology, with its claim to study divine revelations as presented in Scripture, means that other disciplines may consider its methods to be “speculative.” This affirmation and this reproach derive from a particular scientific system (the “hard” sciences) and its disciplinary logic. But this logic cannot necessarily be transposed into the different

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 9

25-09-2021 09:25:48

10

Chapter 1

field of research which theology designates. The general contours of scientific principles are similar across all disciplines, but they must be adapted to their particular object of study. These objects are distinct, requiring different methodologies which often cannot be transposed from one discipline to another. What counts is the coherence between the methods and object of study within a given discipline. While theology is closer to the humanities than the hard sciences, it is distinct from the humanities because it accounts for a transcendent factor in constructing its logical system. By contrast, the humanities voluntarily limit themselves to observable immanent factors—though they constantly run up against the limit of the unobservable and immeasurable which is found at the very heart of human existence, without necessarily obliging them to seek a supernatural explanation. We might say schematically that the humanities theorize various elements from an outside viewpoint, while theology develops a logic from within a phenomenon. Researchers in religious studies thus analyze the “religious” manifestation from the outside, while theologians explain the Christian faith through an internal logical coherence.31 Reproaching the “speculative” character of theology would be tenable if other disciplines had never been concerned with such speculation, which is certainly not the case. In scientific history, the most significant observable changes have all begun with a minimally hypothetical “speculation” postulated by a protagonist or a minority of researchers. A “speculation” will thus be adopted by the scientific community only after a more or less prolonged period, remaining unacknowledged as scientific fact until after such adoption.32 This applies both to the humanities and “hard sciences.” We could say that all “scientific progress” begins with a “speculation,” a “hypothesis,” or a “belief.”33 To reject “speculation” a priori would restrict the generation of new scientific theories and consequently impoverish scientific production. Likewise, we must not forget that before the post-Enlightenment separation of “faith” and “reason,” numerous scientific discoveries were promulgated by “men of faith” who saw their discoveries as serving their faith. We do not deny that the church as an institution has opposed certain discoveries. But “speculation” in the sense of a postulate according to which God has revealed himself in Scripture in a trustworthy manner need not necessarily have a counterproductive effect on science; the very notion of “revelation” can also stimulate scientific research. Neither would we obscure the fact that at the start of the modern era, our Western scientific system was born with the creation of universities centered around a theological faculty. Among other developments, the very “speculative” manner of practicing theology in this period allowed for the rise of the humanities, and later the “hard” sciences (even if grudgingly at times).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 10

25-09-2021 09:25:49

Methodological Criteria

11

The strict separation of objective fact and subjective opinion erected as a law of knowledge several decades ago is vacillating. Of course, religious experiences and theology were classified under subjectivism, while the other scientific disciplines were placed on the side of objectivity. The two sides are no longer cleanly separable, for even the hard and natural sciences must recognize that each of their theories rests on an underlying philosophical view of the world. If it does not necessarily appear in a system of a given scientific theory, it must nevertheless be observed that as human persons scientists cannot assume such a radical separation, and that each scientific project rests on premises which may belong to the subjective side of this divide. For example, the “empirical” methods of contemporary social science often adopted by practical theology are marked by a closer proximity of the researcher to their object of research. Each scientific discipline and every researcher consciously or unconsciously works from premises which may be composed of philosophies, theologies, ideologies, and transcendent or immanent values. Theology understands itself as a science of “orientation,” similar to philosophy which tries to think without God as a postulate. Theology can give momentum to other scientific disciplines and society in general. Its transcendent character conveys a teleological hope which creates the very conditions for an immanent scientific production, but oriented toward the future. It also allows for ethical reflection on the scientific act itself and its multiple applications in society. How should relations between the humanities and theology be defined today?34 We cannot claim to definitively answer this ancient question here. The relations between the two have been heated at times, peaceful at others. History teaches us that the disciplines of the humanities were born during a heated phase. Their foundations have always been marked by a desire for emancipation and separation from theology. The theologies formulated after the Enlightenment were largely motivated either by the will to rediscover theology’s former primacy over other scholarly disciplines, or by the discipline’s adaptations to new scientific demands. As this goal could not be accomplished, instead of fighting the methods of the humanities, they were quickly integrated into theology. Of course, hidden behind this “scientific” struggle were ideological investments which protagonists from both camps were not always ready to acknowledge. Today, their relation seems to be rather peaceful. In the words of Isabelle Grellier: “But the times of anathemas are behind us; specialists in the humanities are probably less likely to be offended when they see their research used for such particular purposes, and for their part, theologians are no longer scandalized to see ecclesial realities studied like any other human reality.”35 If we thus advocate a contemporary dialogue between the disciplines, we must still specify how this dialogue

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 11

25-09-2021 09:25:49

12

Chapter 1

should proceed, or indicate its limits. We could describe this shared process in four steps36: 1) A relation between the humanities and theology is fundamentally possible. Theology not only examines questions of transcendence; faith in God always comes with visible implications in human life. The separation between spiritual and material already is unsustainable in a biblical theology. A theology of creation (Rom 1–3) minimally allows for the valorization of a certain natural revelation, which means that by observing nature, men can come to some sort of knowledge. By its nature, theology has a practical bearing, even if theoretical study of God (in universities and other educational institutions) is often separated from its application (in the churches and individual life) in the West. But this separation imposed by Enlightenment thinkers does not correspond to a biblical view of the knowledge of God.37 To say “God” always implies knowing “about” (i.e., knowledge) and knowledge “of” God (experience), and the two are inseparable. The humanities cannot exist apart from any reference to the knowledge “inside” a “religion.” In the historical chronology of events, such religious perspectives came first; an “outside” perspective followed after, generally forming itself in opposition to theology. Its independence came at the cost of this opposition. To ignore the opposing party would amount to hiding part of its own epistemological foundation. As they are linked to a specific methodology, explanations of the “religious” put forth by the humanities will orient studies in a specific direction. The more this method is complex and flexible, the higher its chances of approaching a phenomenon. But the systematization inherent to every methodology automatically includes an ultimate resistance of the object of study which no methodology can surmount. It is here, where the discourse of the humanities stops at the object’s resistance to explanation, that a theological discourse can still be constructed. 2) Interdisciplinary collaboration is possible insofar as each representative of a scientific discipline recognizes the methodologies of the other disciplines. This mutual recognition implies a posture of humility which renounces privileging its own approach and seeing itself as the only discipline with access to an objective explanation of reality. The multiplicity of fields of study and the multiplication of scientific specializations means that the results of a given study are increasingly differentiated and limited to a small fraction of human knowledge. This fragmented explanation of reality calls for even closer collaboration between disciplines, facilitating a fuller view of the reality in question. 3) The limit of interdisciplinarity is found in the differing epistemologies of theology and the humanities. Both approaches should be respected.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 12

25-09-2021 09:25:49

Methodological Criteria

13

Scientific “truth” is always only provisory, subject to the next revision of the facts. If we look closely, we observe that the theologian and her theologies are not some higher absolute truth, even if they refer to such a truth. Knowledge of God is never more than partial (1 Cor 13:12), even if God’s ultimate and definitive self-revelation came through his Son (Heb 1:1–3).38 This search for truth is a shared task, demanding a concerted effort necessarily drawing on dialogue among theologians and beyond. From a theological perspective, the search for truth ought to take place in the recognition of its own limits. It aims to testify to the truth, but it can never claim to be the truth. 4) Interdisciplinary dialogue requires the honesty to admit the difficulty involved in separating one’s scientific study from one’s personal evolution.39 Scientific work unquestioningly requires us to continually set aside our own presuppositions to develop new hypotheses. But because human nature has its limits, this process cannot be applied absolutely. On the contrary, it should incite us to step back from our scientific work to cast light on our most fundamental presuppositions and most complex motivations. Practical Theology At present, the discipline of practical theology has not defined itself unanimously, leading some practitioners to speak of a crisis in the discipline. Given its particular history and nature, it is hard to see how it could be otherwise. Emancipated from “pastoral theology” by Friedrich Schleiermacher, it first became an independent theological discipline at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Practical theology is situated at the crossroads of the Scriptures, churches (their confessions and traditions), and the context of contemporary societal life. The history of the discipline has seen several stages from its beginnings to the 1960s.40 Nineteenth-century theologians of the “ecclesial paradigm” developed theories of ecclesial organization; those of the “empirical paradigm” in the twentieth century have separated themselves from dogmatic categories, favoring further exploration of the real life of the “empirical” church; thinkers of the “kerygmatic paradigm” (twentieth-century dialectical theology) put the preaching of the word of God at the center of pastoral action and of theology in general. Practical theology was reduced to a methodical discipline of application.41 The twentieth century contributed its share of specializations through the creation of sub-disciplines. This tendency toward specialization has come under question today amid search for greater unity and cohesion among specializations. Different approaches are under discussion: practical theology as a “science of action” (Handlungswissenschaft); empirical theology drawing heavily on methods taken from the humanities;

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 13

25-09-2021 09:25:50

14

Chapter 1

theology which sees itself as part of practice; practical theology as a “science of perception” (Wahrnehmungswissenschaft); and practical theology as theological aesthetics, and a modified return of the three historical groups of approaches cited above. Wolfgang Ratzmann has summarized the discipline’s evolution over the last forty years.42 Instead of distinguishing a temporal succession, he synthesizes different theoretical approaches among the schools of practical theology. He names four: 1) The “action-directed approach” combines different theological theories with the social sciences; 2) the “theological approach” is defined by an overarching theological notion, at further distance from sociological analyses; 3) the “perception approach” plunges completely into reality and the way in which religion is practiced today, drawing on theories from the sociology of religions and showing little interest in ecclesial and pastoral practice; 4) finally, the “phenomenological approach” is a specialization of the preceding approach which attempts to connect the phenomenon of the “holy” with religious life through a theory of the third type above. Ratzmann develops and categorizes these approaches based on their epistemological characteristics. His didactic aim directs him toward a model of practical theology in which each major component cited above finds its legitimacy in proportion with the others. He elucidates his triad with the three verbs “perceive,” “understand,” and “act.”43 We adopt this taxonomy because of its simplicity, integrative strength, and useful pedagogical aim. It is an attractive asset in a discipline which calls itself “practical,” but which has disappeared from view due to the proliferation of all sorts of approaches. In our estimation, a practical theology should include the three following essential functions: (1) Perception: The first component is rather absent from francophone discourse. This is empirical theology—the youngest child of German practical theology, conceived roughly fifteen years ago.44 “Reception” or “perception” approaches focus on the everyday “religious” experience of a people group without grouping the results of their research, still less putting them at the service of local ecclesial actors. They abandon the context of institutional Christianity, opening rather to a wider religious context—a move which dovetails with a broad definition of “religion.” Why do these actors distance themselves so radically from potential practical implications of their studies? The distance between the perception of the “religious” and a practical intervention in this domain is motivated by a fundamental thesis of the theory of perception. These theologians take issue with the classical explication of the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 14

25-09-2021 09:25:50

Methodological Criteria

15

learning process: see—analyze—act. They refute the disjunction between these three phases and the idea that each of these steps is a precondition for the following phase. In this approach, the two later steps are already active from the beginning of the perception of a phenomenon; understanding and action are integrated in the very perception of a phenomenon. The premise of such approaches explains why these theologians are critical of the third component of our practical theology, action. It also explains the break with the empirical church, which would be an advantage in their eyes, insofar as the field of research is considerably expanded toward an “everyday” religiosity. The disadvantages of such an approach are obvious: their concentration on the perception of phenomena alone excludes a biblical interpretation, and consequently any critical evaluation or creative impulse of the word of God toward the church and society. The utility of this component is found in the fact that it retains the researcher’s gaze on phenomena before they are appropriated. (2) Analysis: The second function goes beyond perception, moving toward understanding. Analysis of church practice was certainly the decisive element which changed the “pastoral theology” of former days into the academic discipline of “practical theology.” This latter thus took a step back, both from the “practices” which were its sole concern before its entry into the academy, but also from the church as an institution, from which ecclesial action emanated. Contemporary society and culture henceforth attracted the interest of these practical theologians. With the emergence of the humanities, their analyses— which had been primarily biblical and theological in character—were products of sociology, religious studies, psychology, and anthropology.45 Because it is concerned with the same reality of the “religious” which the quantitative and qualitative methods of the humanities explore, practical theology no longer eschews these methods. As the Bible derives from a pre-modern historical context, theologians from biblical times certainly knew nothing of the concerns of the humanities, which can thus offer theological analysis a complementary perspective.46 (3) Action: Despite the outmoded status of “pastoral theology” and practical theology’s movement away from the acts of the church, at present the discipline cannot completely ignore practice. Practical theology is called to correct ecclesial practices, bringing them into line with the spirit and message of the Gospel. This discipline is a science of action for several reasons: (a) Pragmatic reason implies that the practitioners of theology ought to be trained. Future church leaders must develop professional competence. (b) A second reason follows the logic of the four theological disciplines. The first three are primarily occupied with analytical tasks (with ethics as an exception). If practical theology (as the fourth discipline) were concerned only with analysis, no place would remain for the application of the results of research

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 15

25-09-2021 09:25:50

16

Chapter 1

from the other disciplines. What would homiletics be without the discoveries of biblical exegesis? But conversely, practical theology is also useful for the other three disciplines because it confronts them with the challenges and concerns of society. This fourth theological discipline is the closest to the life of society. (c) We see a third, fundamental reason in the fact that all theology is practical by its very nature. (d) Theology must serve something or someone, whether society, the church, Christians, clergy, and so on. This brings it into filiation with modern sciences which share this utilitarian character. Action as the essential function of practical theology is generally founded on an overarching theological notion such as “mission,” “the Church for others,”47 “the edification of the Church,”48 or “communicating the Gospel.”49 Evidently, practical theology finds itself at a crossroads between an analytic science defined by the past, and a science of action turned toward the future; between a theoretical discipline which retreats from “practices” and a practical discipline which invents new ways of acting; between an ideal theological notion and the ecclesial and societal reality of a given context. It is rare for a discipline to maintain such an inner epistemological tension; most cede to the pressure to clarify and delimit their field of research. Indeed, as it is constituted by this very epistemological tension, practical theology cannot take this path without collapsing. In addition to questions of method and function, there is a continual search for a theologically correct relationship between the three elements among which practical theology situates itself: Scriptures, churches, and experiences. Today we have left behind discussions about linear schemas, deductive and inductive approaches, moving onto the elaboration of models which progress toward a dialogue between these three designated elements.50 Here we present two models of correlation.51 (1) The “triangular correlation model” developed by Laurent Gagnebin establishes three points: “Scriptures, Ecclesial Teaching, and Experiences.”52 Each of these three elements interacts with the two others. According to Gagnebin three binary relations derive from this relation, aiming not to neglect the oppositions between poles, but to regulate tensions and define the contradictions between them more clearly. As a Protestant theologian, Gagnebin highlights the inconvenience of these correlative methods, preferring the biblical position to be normative and thus placed higher than the other two elements. Gagnebin introduces the Holy Spirit as a fourth element into his model to supply a necessary opening toward transcendence and render the model’s rigidity more flexible. His initial triangle thus changes into the base of a pyramid whose peak is the Holy Spirit. In our estimation, the gain in dynamism comes at the price of the model’s clarity. How could one discern and evaluate the action of the Holy Spirit?

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 16

25-09-2021 09:25:51

Methodological Criteria

17

(2) Marc Donzé presents his “five-step correlative model”: The first step is perception; the second, analysis of practices with the help of the humanities; the real correlation comes in the third phase, which brings the results of the analysis into relation with the affirmations of “revelation,” tradition, and history, giving birth to new interpretations and practices; the fourth step involves developing strategies for pastoral action; the fifth phase consists in evaluating the pertinence of projects.53 These two models theorize for practical theology what has always existed in Christianity as an historic phenomenon: the interaction between the evangelical message and its host culture. It is evident that the discipline can no longer do without these correlative ways of operating.54 By its inherently integrative force, practical theology ties the confines of its three fundamental elements (Scripture, church, experience) together, bringing them into complementary or conflictual relationship, aiming for a fruitful correlation giving rise to new analyses or practices. The aim of its research is guided by the nature of its object and the primacy of its chosen location: Scripture, the authority and tradition of a church, or social reality. Sociology of Religions From its origins, the sociology of religions has been concerned with the visible face of the “religious” phenomenon. According to the definition of JeanPaul Willaime, “there are no religions without teachers of religion, and the sociology of religions is above all the study of the multiple social effects of this singular social relation.”55 Before it became an independent science, the sociology of religions was closely bound to its particular religious object. In the history of the discipline in France, this is especially true of the moment of its birth in the 1930s: it was essentially a Catholic religious sociology guided by a clear interest.56 Of course, from the beginning this so-called “pastoral” sociology was integrated in the project of practical theology of the era, which could still tolerate a component of pastoral theology. But the course of history shows the distance which ensued between the sociology of religions and its object of study, culminating in the discipline’s emancipation from its object.57 As is required by the humanities themselves, it is fitting to situate this evolution in the French context of the era. Like the sociology of religions, religious studies birthed from a conflicted climate between two major tendencies within society at the time. One side aimed to be rid of religious constraint, thus creating a true space for existence—a necessary precondition for both nascent disciplines. The other side fought this loss of the “official religion” monopoly, blocking the path of a discipline unbound to religious phenomena. In the case of the French school, this problematic pushed against the influence of Christianity, culminating in the constitution of methodological atheism as a foundation of the young discipline. Jean-Marie Donegani evokes

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 17

25-09-2021 09:25:51

18

Chapter 1

these historical origins to explain what he sees as a lack of studies concerning “narratives of life” in sociology of religions. But his reflections go far beyond this method’s framework, meriting attention particularly for their broad scope and treatment of the epistemological foundations of sociology and theology. Sociology’s methodological atheism, constitutive of its scientific claim, will lead to the prohibition of exploring religious experience and the construction of religious identity, concentrating instead on the social effects which derive from religious affiliation. This atheism is obviously the polar opposite of the theological method immediately encountered within a framework of belief. As a metalanguage, sociology aims to insert an insurmountable distance between knowledge and belief; while theology positions itself as a critical instance at the very heart of the believing universe, and founded on a Revelation which constitutes its point of departure.58

If returning toward a pastoral sociology is no longer fashionable for historical reasons, it is nevertheless appropriate to relativize the methodological presupposition of atheism. This latter is no absolute necessity, but simply one variant in the discipline’s history. The theologian may thus insist on abandoning this presupposition in favor of less reductive deist, theist, or even divine premises (in the sense of the God revealed in Scripture), allowing for a wider horizon of research.59 Adapting a discipline’s epistemological criteria is entirely legitimate if it allows one to better grasp the object of one’s study. This is equally true for the sociology of religions. So long as this latter does not accept that theologians might pursue legitimate sociological study, it cannot entirely clear itself of charges of ideological partiality. After the epistemological foundations are laid, each researcher imposes upon themselves a distance between their own subjective values and their object of study. It is here that one might indeed see a “methodological agnosticism,” even allowing for this term’s specific connotations. Having implemented this separation, researchers in the sociology of religions rigorously apply the discipline’s methodology, guaranteeing the distance mentioned above. It is the task of each researcher to situate their person, their emplacement, and their research interests in respect of this methodology. According to Émile Poulat, the sciences perform four reductions of “religion”: The condition of possibility of all science is the principle of reduction which it postulates at the beginning of its construction, whose legitimacy is only demonstrable by its fecundity, and therefore a posteriori. In this manner, it is distinguished not only from the biblical vision of the Christian churches, but also from the hermetic tradition of the sciences of the occult.60

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 18

25-09-2021 09:25:51

Methodological Criteria

19

Poulat then explains the four levels of this reduction61: a) the “epistemological reduction,” developed primarily by Kant, accepts science only insofar as it observes phenomena which are verifiable by experience under the auspices of reason; b) the “methodological reduction” no longer permits research findings which overstep the possibilities of a chosen methodology; c) the “ideological reduction” can facilitate the denial of what is presented as a reality, declaring it inexistent; d) the “deontological reduction” imposes a continual self-critique on the researcher which translates primarily into her language. The sociology of religions is subject to this reduction like all other sciences. It is not worth rehashing the disputes concerning the longstanding debate over reductionism. But here too, we must recall the context which birthed modern science. Poulat evokes the philosophical foundation (“number” and “phenomenon,” an allusion to Rousseau and Kant) and the historical foundation (the Revolution). He recalls that reductionism cast doubt on the traditional definition of truth. Despite particular historical circumstances, this is where the real stakes concerning the status of theology and the sociology of religions come into play. The former discipline still claims to speak in the name of a theological truth, even though over the last two centuries theology has become more prudent with its subject matter due to its own evolution, largely integrating the criteria of reductionism. For the reasons evoked above, the latter discipline abstains from such absolute pretentions, developing “provisory truths.” If the two could be aware of their respective epistemologies and methods, a conflictual cohabitation would become possible and a fruitful mutual interpellation probable. Theology needs to be reminded of the reality of the social links which “religion” produces to counter the risk of losing itself in a purely speculative philosophy. The sociology of religions could do well to live with the significant uncertainty of being mistaken as to its own fundamental premises, a suspicion which theology raises. As we have above concerning the humanities, we must interrogate the relation between sociology and theology. Jean Joncheray distinguishes three models: 1) In the first, sociology serves theology as a diagnostic tool, by which theologians might better understand the context of the society to which they address their message. 2) In the second, the fruit of sociological research serves to increase the efficacy of pastoral work.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 19

25-09-2021 09:25:52

20

Chapter 1

3) The third perspective foregrounds the interaction of the two disciplines, putting them on the same level and consequently relativizing both.62 Grellier opts rather hastily for this third option. We prefer to maintain the legitimacy of all three models, applying them where appropriate within a determined place and field of research. These three options described by Joncheray can easily be linked to the three essential functions of practical theology outlined by Ratzmann: perception, analysis, and action. In concluding this section, it must be asked: is there not another way to manage the conflict between a humanities discipline and theology? A question raised by Poulat concerning the relation between church history (a branch of theology) and historical science might also apply in our study: How (if possible) ought one move from this mismatched pair, in which interdisciplinarity has no place, to a successful union? How can one get out of this litigious contiguousness in which the theologian co-opts history without reciprocity or feedback, in which the historian annexes theology to their domain while setting the theologian aside?63

For Poulat, the legitimacy of both understandings of history is taken for granted: In this case, there are two forms of understanding reality—ecclesial understanding and historical understanding do not coincide—in which each can take the other as an object. The church has the privileged position of an actor over an observer. The historian has the advantage of a practitioner over his patient; he has the time and benefits of the observer, subject to restricting conditions.64

He proposes a third way: a field of study for each of the two disciplines, a history which would examine its own hidden side, because each historical approach entails some loss.65 According to him, it is not enough to relate only to “what really happened,” but what is hidden and/or lost must also be explored. The task of this third model would be to measure the dark region which escapes our investigations. This goes beyond the conflict between a “religious” science and a “critical” science because this confrontation would hide something which our study had missed. We find Poulat’s proposition compelling and apply it to the sociology of religions. We are conscious that this transposition cannot take place without a necessary adaptation to the characteristics of the sociology of religions. But the loss of energy which the rivalry entailed in the past will be better spent in exploring the incompleteness proper to every scientific discipline.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 20

25-09-2021 09:25:52

Methodological Criteria

21

The Study of Mission We have given a summary definition of the study of mission above. It is now incumbent upon us to present its methodology in more detail. Like practical theology, missiology works in a correlational mode. This reciprocal relation is visible at several levels, including the relation between a descriptive missiology (history of missions, humanities) and a normative missiology (theology of mission); between deductive and inductive methods; between practice and theory of mission; and above all between Scripture and context (inculturation, contextualization). Presenting these different correlations indicates the principal difference between missiology and practical theology: the first moves between two relational poles, while the second is constructed across three poles. The “church” factor is less important in missiology, even if only in cases of a first proclamation of the Gospel among people in a specific culture. This “factor” is still a future reality; it does not exist at this stage. The future local community will be the fruit of the proclamation of the Word of God in the power of the Holy Spirit, and of elements specific to a cultural context. In comparison with the tripolar model, which must account for traditions and authoritative writings in the churches, the bipolar interaction has the advantage of a stronger and more direct influence of Scripture on context. The influence of Scripture in this latter model passes through the mediation of the churches. At best, this mediation constitutes a stabilizing force for the constitution of the future community; at worst, it poses a considerable obstacle to this constitution. In saying this, we are in no way questioning the importance of the church: the church sets those who are “sent” in motion. It is both the point of sending of a Christian community and the goal of mission. But it cannot claim an equal importance with Scripture and context according to a missiological logic. Another reason in favor of this position will be laid out below, at the second level of challenges. Must missiology be understood as a branch of practical theology? Or on the contrary, should it have an independent status alongside the four classical theological disciplines? What is at stake in answering this question is spread across two levels. The first is situated in theological teaching and its disciplinary priorities; the second, more fundamental level interrogates the legitimacy of “mission” among major biblical notions. The first level: we have examined this question in a previous study.66 We distinguished three models: the global approach integrates the notion of mission into the teaching of the four extant theological disciplines. This proposition has the advantage of bringing missiology into fruitful dialogue with the other disciplines. In the particular approach, missiology is integrated as a sub-discipline of practical theology, according it a definite place within theological teaching. Finally, an independent approach gives missiology the status

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 21

25-09-2021 09:25:52

22

Chapter 1

of a fifth autonomous theological discipline. Each solution grants missiology either a minimal (the particular approach) or maximal place (the global and independent approaches) within theology which must be justified. This brings us to the second level of what is at stake: is it theologically justifiable to give missiology an important place within theology? It seems that such theological legitimacy is indeed granted by at least three fundamental facts: 1) Ever since the Jerusalem “council” described in Acts 15, Christianity has taken on the notion of a universal “religion.” Emancipated from its initial status as a “Jewish sect” (airesis, Acts 24:5–14, 28:22), it became a movement with a universal scope in light of its message (which includes all humanity) and its missionary mandate to testify concerning the resurrected one (Matt. 28:16–20). The universal salvation brought and proposed by the pantokratôr assumes an intrinsically missionary character. 2) The gospels and epistles are largely the literary fruits of missionary activity.67 The authors of the gospels sought to announce the Good News to a Jewish and/or pagan audience.68 For the most part, the epistles originate in the context of a relation between the apostles and young nascent communities. 3) For these two reasons, theology and mission form a unity at the beginning of the Christian era. Because of this eminent place given to “mission” in the Bible, we argue for a correspondingly important status within theological teaching. “Mission” is a fundamental and theological notion in Scripture. The relation between missiology and practical theology itself presupposes a more fundamental theological question, the relation between mission and the church. From a theological perspective, which of these two realities is broader and more fundamental regarding the history of salvation? In recent history, we remark that the relation between missionary space and theology of mission radically changed in two periods: the period between the two world wars, and since the 1970s.69 The ecclesial criteria of missionary space dominated the first period. The rediscovery of the church in missiology resulted in mission becoming an ecclesial activity: mission was submitted to the church. In the second period, this relation was inverted in missiology due to mission’s attachment to the very notion of God; the church became a function of mission. This contextual criterion of missionary space is still current today. But an historical evolution is not sufficient to warrant the theological legitimacy of either notion’s superiority. Indeed, in the New Testament, the notion of mission seems to precede the church chronologically. Jesus Christ first preached the kingdom of God,70 and the ekklêsia occupied a

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 22

25-09-2021 09:25:53

Methodological Criteria

23

secondary—that is, lesser—place in his teaching.71 This kingdom of God will come about through mission, as is first visible in the sending of the disciples in Jesus’ time (Matt. 9:35–10:23), then in this mandate’s expansion beyond the historic twelve (Acts 1:8). The “first history of Christianity”72 reflects the realization of Jesus’s kerygmatic “schema”: Jesus’s disciples form a group, growing into a mass movement in Jerusalem73 well before the term ekklêsia appears in Acts.74 The churches are thus a fruit of the proclamation of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ following a dynamic movement called “mission.” Mission as a notion is not confined to the second Testament; it is inscribed in the first Testament as early as the calling of Abraham, a pagan man through whom God’s blessing will spread through all families of the earth (Gen 12:1–3). This supreme notion stretches throughout Scripture as a guiding theme all the way to the eschatological dawn. The Old Testament qâhal,75 the holy assembly—the equivalent of the ekklêsia—is thus itself a fruit of this choice of YHWH, the election of Israel. This perfect love, an exclusive love between the living God and his people, transforms into a deeply moving model, the possibility of a similar relation between the nations and YHWH. Divine election signifies not an elitist privilege, but a universalist opening according to the principle of pars pro toto—which, of course, is not yet identical to the New Testament notion of mission, but which presents enough similarity to allow for their juxtaposition.76 We can conclude that this historical evolution of missionary space since 1970 toward systematically prioritizing the notion of mission over the notion of church is theologically legitimate: the church is a function of mission. Otherwise, the mission of God would be limited and restricted to the church alone—an option which lacks sufficient theological grounding. We can now understand why most practical theologians almost totally ignore missiology. Since this discipline is the product of Schleiermacher’s paradigm of “direction of the Church,” it places a high value both on the church itself, and on the place of the church within theological teaching. We could thus link this conception of practical theology to the first period of missionary space described above, the ecclesial criterion: mission is a function of the church.77 If the theorists of practical theology were to recall the notion of mission, they would insert it as a branch in their disciplinary edifice; otherwise, it would be completely forgotten. In this perspective, mission is thus an ecclesial task alongside the diaconate, catechesis, preaching, and so on, envisaged within the perspective of the churches. But this restricted view rarely (if ever) permits seeing beyond the limits of its own perspective. However, because of its universal objective, mission is precisely concerned with going beyond the borders of the church. Furthermore, if mission were given its formerly accepted definition—the preaching of the Gospel in far-off lands—it would have utterly lost the battle; missiology would no longer figure at all

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 23

25-09-2021 09:25:53

24

Chapter 1

in such a conception of practical theology. Practical theology still holds to this ecclesio-centrism (the tripolar correlation between Scripture, ecclesial Teaching, and Experience), while missiology exhibits a theocentric tendency (the bipolar correlation between Scripture and context). Both approaches are legitimate within the limits of their epistemological foundations and the orientation of their research. Our Approach The range of methods available for our project is rich and complex. We must now give our choice of method and our reasons for this choice. (1) This book started as a theological doctoral thesis defended in a theology faculty; this is the location and perspective for the development of this project. If we situate our method in Ratzmann’s classification concerning the various theoretical approaches to practical theology, his second, “theological approach” most neatly corresponds to our methodology.78 This implies a method stemming from a fundamental trans-empirical theological notion. It proposes theories of action and guiding directives to the churches. Ratzmann explicitly notes “mission” as among essential theological notions capable of structuring such a methodological approach. We have chosen precisely this notion of “mission” for our thesis, which leads us to the next point. (2) This book presents a missiological thesis. Mission studies is a theological discipline. We have shown the importance of the idea of “mission” in Scripture, which would justify a more eminent place for missiology in the disciplinary “canon” of theology. We accord missiology an independent place as the fifth discipline of theology. This autonomy procures missiology a status fitting with a reformation of in-depth theological studies for the Western context. The tools which missiology offers are indispensable for ecumenical dialogue (i.e., between churches), interreligious dialogue (between religions), intercultural dialogue (between cultures), and dialogue with Christianity outside of the Western context (between models of contextualization), which today constitutes the Christianity of the majority-world. These tools allow for a new contextualization of the Gospel message in the West, which is precisely our concern in this study. Missiology is proposed as a privileged partner of religious studies, the sociology of religions, and anthropology. It works with different materials produced in the process of contextualization. It thus demonstrates its relevance for practice, insofar as this study implies and hopes to lead to action. In light of current challenges in theological teaching and the evolution of Christianity, we can conclude with the remarks of Theodor Ahrens, who speaks “of a theological discipline of the future.”79 Such missiological study bears two further implications:

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 24

25-09-2021 09:25:54

25

Methodological Criteria

(a) for the reasons stated above, this work is more of a missiological study than a thesis in practical theology; (b) the two disciplines work with a correlational method, but practical theology privileges a correlational triad, while missiology prefers the bi-correlational model. This latter model produces theories of application for the churches, in the sense of Ratzmann’s “theological approach.” In order to visualize the challenges posed by these two models of correlation, they are schematized below (see figures 1.2 and 1.3).   The astute reader will have observed that we appropriate the latter model for our work, since it is primarily a missiological study. “The church” is given slightly less priority than “Scripture” and “context,” but she is not neglected since she is the target audience for the product of the correlation between Scripture and context.80 We must go a bit further to better explain these different missiological approaches. What correspondences exist between the two poles of the missiological correlational model and the stages of this book? Chapters 2 and 3 naturally correspond to the “contexts” pole in missiology. The study of “the current ‘religious’ context in Europe” in chapter 2 adopts a sociology of Churches

Scripture

Experience

Figure 1.2  The Correlational Model of Practical Theology According to Gagnebin.

Churches

Contexts

Figure 1.3  The Correlational Model of Missiology, Enriched by Ratzmann’s Classification of “Models of Theoretical Approach” in Practical Theology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 25

25-09-2021 09:25:56

26

Chapter 1

religions perspective. Because this perspective is only one possible approach to describing religious phenomena among others, we have added other (historical, philosophical, etc.) perspectives in the third chapter. Chapter 4 focuses on the “Scripture” pole (theological criteria). Only in chapter 5 do we elaborate a true theology of mission for the European/Western context. A descriptive missiology is at work in chapters 2 and 3, while chapter 4 offers a prescriptive missiology. Once more, these two genres correspond to the two poles of our theoretical model. We could apply the methodological choices of this study to the model given above in the following manner (see figure 1.4).  (3) Finally, this book is an interdisciplinary study with a strong accent on the sociology of religions. This latter examines the social bonds which the “religious” might produce from a point of view exterior to the “Christian faith.” This perspective will serve as an analytical tool of the “religious” phenomenon in Europe in chapter 2. Since the sociology of religions does not go beyond its own analytical framework, it cannot adopt a theological and forward-looking perspective. This epistemological incompatibility will be marked by limiting the sociology of religions to the following chapter and attributing it a secondary role in this theological work. Interdisciplinary work between theology and the sociology of religions is understood in the following sense: first, we assign a clear place to each discipline to properly separate the characteristics constitutive of each discipline (sociology of religions in chapter 2; theology in chapters 3–5). Next, we seek a dialogue between disciplines toward the end of these respective chapters. An interaction between them is possible if the ensuing reciprocal relativization stops short of putting the very heart of each discipline in question. In this scenario, we welcome the conflictual character which constitutes a creative supplementary factor for each discipline involved.

Scripture: ch. 4, prescriptive missiology Contextual Theology: Ch. 5, results placed at churches’ disposal

Contexts: ch. 2 and 3, descriptive missiology

Figure 1.4  The Correlation Model in Missiology Enriched by Ratzmann’s Classification of “Models of Theoretical Approach” in Practical Theology, Adapted to the Present Book.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 26

25-09-2021 09:25:57

Methodological Criteria

27

We now seek a correspondence between the different interdisciplinary models according to Joncheray and the stages of our work.81 Chapter 2 corresponds to Joncheray’s first mode of procedure: sociology serves as a diagnostic tool for theology. The interdisciplinary interactions showcased in chapters 3 and 4 have moments of calm and of conflict. This thus corresponds to the third phase in Joncheray’s model. We have now sketched this book’s road map (at least methodologically). In any case, the road is marked out well enough for this book’s content to emerge calmly throughout our creative scientific meandering.

NOTES 1. David J. Bosch, Believing in the Future: Toward a Missiology of Western Culture (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1995); French translation: Croire en l’avenir: Vers une missiologie de la culture occidentale. Lettre interéglises du Centre de Recherche Théologique Missionnaire, vol. 2, n° 69–70 (1995–2): 43. 2. Cf. Marc Spindler, “Occident, terre de mission,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission (Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/ CLÉ, 2001), 237–240. 3. We will explain these terms in chapter 3. 4. Bruno Chenu, “Théologies contextuelles,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 340–343. Cf. the following introductory works: Klauspeter Blaser, La Théologie au xxe siècle (Lausanne: L’Âge d’Homme, 1995); Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1992); Bruno Chenu, Théologies chrétiennes des Tiers mondes (Paris: Centurion, 1987). 5. As it was born in the West, feminist theology is an exception. Cf. Elisabeth Parmentier, Les filles prodigues. Défis des théologies féministes (Geneva: Labor et Fides, coll. Lieux théologiques n° 32, 1998). 6. Cf. Jan Van Raalte, “Western Europe—The Netherlands: Emancipation and Pluralization,” in Missiology, An Ecumenical Introduction. Texts and Contexts of Global Christianity, dir. F. J. Verstraelen (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 31–48; Richard Bliese, “Mission in North America,” in Leitfaden ökumenischer Missionstheologie, dir. Christoph Dahling-Sander et al. (Gütersloh: Kaiser/Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2003), 519–531; Dietrich Werner, “Mission in Deutschland,” in Leitfaden ökumenischer Missionstheologie, 545–561. 7. Hansjörg Gantenbein, “La France, pays de mission?” La définition de la mission et les critères d’une missiologie de la culture occidentale,” M.A. thesis at the Faculty of Protestant Theology, Université Marc Bloch, Strasbourg, 22 May 2006, 81–89, 98–100. 8. Bruno Chenu, “Théologies contextuelles,” 340. 9. “Vera théologia practica est.” Martin Luther, Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe-Tischreden) 1, n° 153 (henceforth WA).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 27

25-09-2021 09:25:57

28

Chapter 1

10. Lesslie Newbigin, “L’Occident peut-il se convertir?”  Perspectives missionnaires n° 29, 1995, 7–26; Foolishness to the Greeks. The Gospel and Western Culture, coll. WCC Mission Series n° 6 (Geneva/Grand Rapids: WCC/Eerdmans, 1986); Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir”; Friedemann Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas. Missionstheologien im europäischen Kontext, coll. Systematisch-theologische Monografien n° 8 (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 2002). We will present the work of these three missiologists in chapter 3. 11. Ian Rutter used the same method as Walldorf on a larger scale, analyzing the missiological content of all church declarations beyond the European context. Cf. Ian Rutter, “Une analyse des fondements théologiques des déclarations récentes du Conseil oecuménique des Églises, de l’Église catholique romaine et du mouvement évangélique à propos de la mission et de l’évangélisation,” doctoral thesis, Faculty of Protestant Theology, Université Marc Bloch (Strasbourg, 2004). It is regrettable that Rutter did not consult Walldorf’s book. 12. Besides Bosch’s work, we are aware of only three publications proceeding from the workgroups on epistemology and history: J. A. Kirk and K. J. Vanhoozer, dirs., To Stake a Claim. Mission and the Western Crisis of Knowledge (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1999); Alan Kreider, dir., The Origins of Christendom in the West (Edinburgh/New York: T&T Clark, 2001); Hugh McLeod & Werner Ustorf, The Decline of Christendom in Western Europe, 1750–2000 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). From 1995–2000, A. Neely and Wilbert R. Shenk published a series of twenty-six short books with Trinity Press International (Harrisburg), Christian Mission and Modern Culture, which held to the group’s theme. Several exposés and reports are accessible in the private archives of two former French members of the research group, Edith Bernard and Neal Blough, as well as in my own library. For the history of this group, cf. the prefaces to the four cited works, as well as Alex Gillet, “Vers une missiologie de la culture occidentale,” Église et Mission n° 271 (September 1993): 37–44. Outside the European context, an initiative dubbed the “Gospel and Our Culture Network,” published by Eerdmans in a series of the same name (but not to be confused with the UK’s “Gospel and Our Culture Program” which preceded it), continued similar reflections. 13. A more precise delimitation and definition of the terms “West” and “Europe” will be presented in chapter 2. 14. Jean Baubérot and Jean-Louis Leuba, “Oecuménisme,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 1085–1104. 15. Bosch, “Evangelisation, Evangelisierung,”  Lexikon missionstheologischer Grundbegriffe, 102–105; Jacques Nicole, “Evangélisation,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 552; Klauspeter Blaser, “Mission,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 977–992; Jean-François Zorn, “Mission et évangélisation,” in Introduction à la Théologie Pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf (Strasbourg: PUS, 1997), 315–338; Jean Comby, “Evangélisation,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 125–129; Jean-Claude Girondin, “Evangélisation (Théologie et déontologie),” Dictionnaire de théologie pratique, 332–344; Jean-François Zorn, “Entreprendre la mission et l’évangélisation,” in Précis de théologie pratique, coll. Théologies pratiques, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, (Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004), 253–272.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 28

25-09-2021 09:25:58

Methodological Criteria

29

16. Cf. the following article linking both terms: Fritz Lienhard, “Mission/ Evangélisation,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, Jean-Yves Lacoste, dir., 1st ed. (Paris: PUF, coll. Quadrige 2002), 744–747. 17. It is noteworthy that even the Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie includes no definition of mission, but only an article on the missio Dei, indicative of the difficulty of the task. 18. Helmut Burkhardt, Christ werden. Bekehrung und Wiedergeburt, Anfang des christlichen Lebens (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, coll. TVG: Orientierung, 1999). 19. Cf. “Mission: une définition provisoire,” in David J. Bosch, Dynamique de la mission chrétienne. Histoire et avenir des modèles missionnaires (Lome/Geneva/ Paris: Haho/ Labor et Fides/Karthala, 1995), 20–23. 20. Ibid, 525–530; Zorn, “Mission (Missio Dei),” 216–218. 21. The notion of missio Dei was a necessary theocentric readjustment to counter human pretentions of an ecclesiocentric theology of mission. Today more emphasis should be placed on the missio Christi to account for the Christological basis of Mission. 22. Fritz Lienhard and François Schlemmer, “Mission intérieure,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 993; Jean-Paul Morley, “Mission populaire évangélique,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 993–994; Laurent Gambarotto, “Wichern, Johann Hinrich (1808–1881),” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 165–166; Zorn, “Mission et évangélisation,” 316–319; Sébastien Fath, “Christianisation et déchristianisation,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 46–50; Marc Spindler, “Missions populaires,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 219–223. 23. Klauspeter Blaser, “Missiologie,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 213–216; Jean-François Zorn, La missiologie. Emergence d’une discipline théologique, coll. Actes et recherches (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004). 24. Warneck taught missiology in this faculty since 1896, but the chair was not created until 1908. 25. Marc Spindler, “Aux origines de la missiologie: Gustav Warneck,” Perspectives missionnaires vol. 2 no. 34 (1997): 23–33. 26. Cf. the three models of teaching missiology in Bosch, Dynamique, 654–658. 27. Both possible variants are visible in the French translation of the name of the research group “The Missiology of Western Culture”: cf. chapter 1, note 12. The group’s members speak of a “missiology de la culture occidentale” or “missiology pour la culture occidentale” without justifying their translations. 28. We thus take up a historically protestant position: Scripture is the norma normans. 29. Jean-François Zorn, “La contextualisation: un concept théologique?” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses, vol. 77 no. 2 (1997) : 171–189. 30. Wilfried Härle, Outline of Christian Doctrine: An Evangelical Dogmatics, trans. Ruth Yule, and Nicholas Sagovsky (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015), 4. 31. Ibid., 10. 32. Cf. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 4th ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012). 33. Cf. Michaël Polanyi, The Logic of Liberty: Reflections and Rejoinders (New York: Routledge, coll. International Library of Sociology, 2010), ch. 2.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 29

25-09-2021 09:25:58

30

Chapter 1

34. Cf. Jean Joncheray, “Théologie et sciences humaines,” in Précis de théologie pratique, coll. Théologies pratiques, dirs. Gilles Routhier & Marcel Viau (Bruxelles/ Montréal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004), 167–178; Isabelle Grellier, “Les démarches de théologie pratique,” in Introduction à la Théologie Pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf (Strasbourg: PUS, 1997), 41–58. 35. Ibid., 48. 36. This section draws in part on Joncheray, “Théologie et sciences humaines,” 171–176. 37. Cf. the Greek semantic field knowing/knowledge, for example, in Rudolf Bultmann, “ginôskô, gnôsis, epiginôskô, epignôsis,” Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, 688–710. 38. In this verse from 1 Corinthians, the Greek verb ginôskô appears three times. 39. Cf. Yves Lambert et al., dir., Le religieux des sociologues. Trajectoires personnelles et débats scientifiques (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997). 40. For this history, cf. Bernard Kaempf, “Réception et évolution de la Théologie Pratique dans le protestantisme,” in Précis de théologie pratique, coll. Théologies pratiques, dirs. Gilles Routhier & Marcel Viau (Brussells/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/ Novalis, 2004), 9–25; idem, “Histoire de la théologie pratique,” in Introduction à la Théologie Pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf (Strasbourg: PUS, 1997), 13–39; Gilbert Adler, “La théologie pastorale dans la théologie catholique de l’après guerre à Vatican II,” in Précis de théologie pratique, 27–38. 41. These three “paradigms” primarily describe the German history of the discipline which largely dominates practical theology. 42. “Typen” praktisch-theologischer Theoriebildung, in Wolfgang Ratzmann, “Praktische Theologie: ein unübersichtliches Fach in didaktischer Herausforderung,” in Didaktische Modelle Praktischer Theologie, Martin Steinhäuser & Wolfgang Ratzmann (dirs.) (Leipzig: Evang. Verl. Anstalt, 2002), 11–28. 43. The original German expressions are wahrnehmen, verstehen, gestalten. Ibid., 13–16. 44. Astrid Dinter et al., Einführung in die Empirische Theologie. Gelebte Religion erforschen, coll. UTB n° 2888 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007). Immersion in a given everyday religious context is also practiced by francophone practical theologians, but they situate it in the following phase, “analysis.” 45. For an overview of methods taken from the humanites, see the following three essays from Précis de théologie pratique, op. cit.: Marcel Viau, “La méthodologie empirique en théologie pratique,” 87–98; Jérôme Coutard, “Entretien, focus group et analyse de contenu,” 99–104; Jean-Marie Donegani, “Les récits de vie,” 105–117. 46. “Lived religion” and “empirical theology” will be discussed in chapter 3. 47. This conception is inspired by Bonhoeffer and his reflections on a world without religion. Cf. Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison: Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, Volume 8, ed. John W. de Gruchy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010), 365. 48. For a helpful introduction to approaches defined by “the edification of the Church,” see Bernard Kaempf, “Oïkodomique,” in Introduction à la Théologie Pratique, 201–224.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 30

25-09-2021 09:25:59

Methodological Criteria

31

49. This approach is defined by Catholic practical theologian Norbert Mette in Einführung in die katholische Praktische Theologie (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2005). 50. Grellier, “Démarches,” 45–47. 51. In this space, we cannot go beyond francophone models of correlation. We must nevertheless highlight the considerable relation of the works of Paul Tillich and Edward Schillebeeckx in this domain. Cf. Marc Dumas, “Corrélation—Tillich et Schillebeeckx,” in Précis de théologie pratique, 71–83. 52. Grellier, “Démarches,” 47; Laurent Gagnebin, “Comment se fait la théologie pratique?” in La Théologie pratique. Statut, méthodes, perspectives d’avenir, Textes du Congrès international oecuménique et francophone de théologie pratique, coll. Le Point Théologique, n° 57, Bernard Reymond & Jean-Michel Sordet, dirs (Paris: Beauchesne, 1993), 33–41; idem, “La norme de la Bible en théologie pratique,” in Précis de théologie pratique, 191–201. 53. Marc Donzé, “La théologie pratique entre corrélation et prophétie,” in Pratique et Théologie, coll. Pratiques no. 1 (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1989), 183–190; Grellier, “Démarches,” 47–48. 54. Cf. the methodical progression proposed in Fritz Lienhard, La démarche de théologie pratique, coll. Théologies pratiques (Brussells/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/ Novalis, 2006). 55. Jean-Paul Willaime, Sociologie des religions, coll. Que sais-je?, 3rd edition (Paris: PUF, 2004), 124–125. 56. “De la sociologie religieuse à la sociologie des religions,” in ibid., 41–61. We cannot forget the other event marking the study of religions and religious phenomena in France—the creation of the fifth section at the École Pratique des Hautes Études, examining “religious sciences,” in 1886 following the closing of five faculties of Catholic theology. It thus assured a place for research on “religions” in superior public education, but with a scientific character and within a secularized framework. [Translator’s note: “secularized” translates laïque, designating the actively areligious public sphere which has characterized France since the legal separation of church and state in 1905.] Cf. “L’institution des sciences religieuses,” in Emile Poulat, Liberté, laïcité. La guerre des deux France et le principe de la modernité, coll. Religion et sociétés (Paris: Cerf/Cujas, 1987), 285–334. 57. Jean-Pierre Bastian, “Sociologie des missions,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 324–327. 58. Jean-Marie Donegani, “Les récits de vie,” in Précis de théologie pratique, 113–114. 59. Jacqueline Lagrée, “Déisme/Théisme,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 1st ed., “Quadrige,” 305–36. 60. “La religion quatre fois réduite par la science. La querelle du réductionnisme,” in Poulat, Liberté, laïcité, 405–422; citation from 413. 61. Ibid, 409–415. 62. Jean Joncheray, “Comment peuvent travailler ensemble des sociologues, des théologiens, des pasteurs,” Revue des sciences religieuses no. 3 (1995): 322–333; Grellier, “Démarches,” 49–50.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 31

25-09-2021 09:26:00

32

Chapter 1

63. Émile Poulat, “Anamnèse,” in Anamnèsis, dir. Jean-Marie Mayeur et al., Histoire du christianisme (Des origines à nos jours), vol. XIV (Paris: Desclée/Fayard, 2000), 268, 259–278. 64. Ibid, 270. 65. Ibid, 271–276. In Poulat’s usage, “hidden side” does not mean expanding the field of study to include metaphysics. 66. Gantenbein, “La France,” 83–84, 98–100; cf. Jean-François Zorn, “La missiologie: discipline théologique à part entière ou branche de la théologie pratique?” in Missiologie, 91–100. 67. There are too few New Testament exegetical studies examining mission. Here is a brief bibliography: Martin Kähler, Schriften zur Christologie und Mission, coll. WMANT no. 13, 7th ed. (Munich: Kaiser, 1971); Ferdinand Hahn, Das Verständnis der Mission im Neuen Testament (Neukirchen: Neukirchner, 1963); Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (London: SCM Press, 1986); Martin Hengel, “Das früheste Christentum als eine jüdische messianische und universalistische Bewegung,” Theologische Beiträge vol. 28 (Aug. 1997): 197–210; Peter Stuhlmacher, “Weg, Stil und Konsequenzen urchristlicher Mission,” Theologische Beiträge vol. 12 no. 3 (1981): 107–135; idem, “Die Bildung der ersten Gemeinden, ihr Zusammenhalt und ihre Mission,” in Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testamentes, vol. 1, second edition (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997), 196–221; Jostein Ådna and Hans Kvalbein, The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles, coll. WUNT n° 127 (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000); Eckhard J. Schnabel, Early Christian Mission, 2 vols. (Downers Grove: IVP, 2004); idem, “Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments als Missionstheologie: Die missionarische Realität der Kirche des ersten Jahrhunderts und die Theologie der ersten Theologen,” Jahrbuch für Evangelikale Theologie, vol. 20 (2006): 139–164; Florian Wilk Von Gryter, Jesus und die Völker in der Sicht der Synoptiker, coll. BZNW no. 109 (Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2002); John P. Dickson, Mission-Commitment in Ancient Judaism and in the Pauline Communities. The Shape, Extent and Background of Early Christian Mission, coll. WUNT II, n° 159 (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003); Oda Wischmeyer, “Die paulinische Mission als religiöse und literarische Kommunikation,” in Die Anfänge des Christentums, Friedrich Wilhelm Graf, dir. (Frankfurt: Fischer, 2009), 90–121. 68. Specialists estimate that two of the four gospels were addressed to Christians of pagan origin. Cf. Daniel Marguerat, dir., Introduction au Nouveau Testament. Son histoire, son écriture, sa théologie, coll. Le monde de la Bible no. 41, 3rd ed. (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004), 48, 97–98. We need not insist on the fact that despite his Jewish target audience, Matthew’s Gospel applies to far more than this audience due to its universal message (cf. the section on “Matthew 28” the cited work). Some do not rule out a missionary objective even for John’s Gospel: cf. Rudolf Schnackenburg, “Der Missionsgedanke des Johannesevangeliums im heutigen Horizont,” in Das Johannesevangelium, IV. Teil, Ergänzende Auslegungen und Exkurse, A. Wikenhauser et al., dir., coll. HThK, 3rd ed. (Fribourg/Basel/ Vienna: Herder, 1994), 58–72 (citation on 68). Cf. for a bibliographic indication of

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 32

25-09-2021 09:26:01

Methodological Criteria

33

mission theology for the four gospels: Paul Foster, Community, Law and Mission in Matthew’s Gospel, coll. WUNT II, no. 177 (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004); Stephen G. Wilson, The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts, coll. Society for NT Studies Monographies Series no. 23 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973); Andreas Käser, “Den Juden zuerst, aber auch den Heiden: ‘Mission’ im Markusevangelium. Beobachtungen einer kompositionellen Lesung von Mk 4, 35–38, 26,” Theologische Beiträge vol. 35 no.2 (April 2004): 69–80; Andreas J. Köstenberger, The Mission of Jesus and the Disciples According to the Forth Gospel. With Implications for the Fourth Gospel’s Purpose and the Mission of Contemporary Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998). 69. Gantenbein, “La France,” 79–80. See also Jean-François Zorn, “Les espaces de la Mission,” Autres Temps vol. 43 (Sept. 1994) : 48–55; Marc Spindler, Pour une théologie de l’espace, coll. Cahiers théologiques n° 59 (Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1968). 70. Georg V. Vicedom (1903–1974), a German missiologist, strongly insisted on the kingdom of God in theology of mission. 71. The term ekklêsia appears only three times in the gospels (Matt. 16:18, 18:17), in addition to the two Johannine images of the future messianic community—the flock (Jn 10) and the vine (Jn 15). 72. We borrow this expression from Daniel Marguerat, La première histoire du christianisme (Les Actes des apôtres), coll. LeDiv no. 180 (Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 1999). 73. On the emblematic numbers “3000” and “5000” in Acts 2:41 and 4:4 as growth markers, cf. dans Gust Ledergerber, Das Wachstum der Gemeinde. Exegetische Untersuchungen zum Wesen des Gemeindewachstums im Neuen Testament (Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 2001), 60–64. 74. This term first appears in Acts 5:11. It is, therefore, problematic to speak of the “birth of the church” at Pentecost, since the first Christians still fully identified themselves as the chosen people of the first covenant. 75. Heinz-Josef Fabry, “qâhal,” Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, vol. 6, 1204–1222. 76. On the problematic of the notion of “mission” in the Old Testament, see the literature review in Siegbert Riecker, Mission im Alten Testament? Ein Forschungsüberblick mit Auswertung, coll. Beiheft Interkulturelle Theologie, Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft vol. 10 (Frankfurt: Otto Lembeck, 2008). 77. For example, this perspective can be found in Fritz Lienhard, “Mission/ Evangélisation,” 744: “In the broad sense of the term, mission (m.) is a fundamental characteristic of the Church.” 78. Ratzmann, “Praktische Theologie,” 12–13. 79. Theodor Ahrens, Gegebenheiten. Missionswissenschaftliche Studien, Frankfurt: Otto Lembeck, 2005), 331–332. 80. We do not dispute the church’s role in announcing the Gospel. Scripture always passes through the mediation of a church (whether mediation through translation, historical mediation, homiletical mediation, etc.). But our correlational model is based on the fact that the Christian community does not yet exist at the moment when

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 33

25-09-2021 09:26:01

34

Chapter 1

the “Good News” is announced; or, in the case of the West, we envisage at least the possibility of a rupture with extant churches. The model according to Gagnebin cannot offer this possibility of rupture because the church is one of the three constitutive poles of the model. 81. Joncheray, “Travailler ensemble,” 322–333.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 34

25-09-2021 09:26:01

Chapter 2

The Current “Religious” Context

DEFINING TERRITORIES: “EUROPE,” “THE WEST” The term “Europe” designates a variable number of countries within the frontiers of the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, and the Ural Mountains.1 The most diverse cultural influences have forged this small continent throughout history. The Romans first borrowed the term from the Greeks to designate the Mediterranean world, before successively integrating Gaul and a large part of Great Britain into this geographic notion. The expansion of Christianity led to the term’s abandonment in favor of “Christendom” from the eighth century onward—a sign that this religion had become a constitutive element of the continent’s identity. The expression “Europe” saw a resurgence beginning in the seventeenth century, after which it refers more to a cultural identity than political or economic factors, though these latter factors are currently on the rise and the European Union has made substantial economic progress. In 2007, political Europe encompassed fifty-seven states constituting the Council of Europe and twenty-seven states forming the European Union (with Bulgaria and Romania as the latest additions). The historical evolution of modern Europe can be described as follows: a political dominance over nearly the entire world until the beginning of the twentieth century; a diffusion of industrial civilization and its economic models; a common Western Christendom expressed in diverse Christian confessions; the formation of nation-states; and finally, the birth of philosophies and ideologies linked to the Enlightenment, coupled with the direct correlation between modern natural and technical sciences on the one hand, and the relation between the Weltanschauung or ideology and the process of secularization on the other. 35

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 35

25-09-2021 09:26:01

36

Chapter 2

It is legitimate to integrate our term “Europe” into the broader notion of “the West.”2 On maps from the time of the discovery of the Americas in 1492, Europe was sketched as the tip of the Asian continent. We can thus maintain that Latin America and North America are part of the West as well. Other historical reasons for integrating the Americas into the West include the waves of immigrants toward the “new world” and its cultural evolution which draws deeply on its European sources. Even more than Europe, the West is primarily a cultural (as opposed to geographic or spatial) notion. The West is defined in opposition to the East. Other authors who emphasize that Europe is a veritable synthesis between the Greek spirit and Christianity do not want to exclude orthodoxy from the West. Over the centuries, spatial frontiers between East and West have moved according to evolving political conditions. The particularly Western mind has been successively forged by several peoples. These ethnic groups have (or have not) voluntarily accepted and adapted values foreign to their own. Phillippe Nemo distinguishes five constitutive events for the countries of the Western culture.3 Briefly, these are: (a) First phase: the inventions of the Greeks including the City, freedom under the rule of law, science, and school; (b) Second phase: the creations of the Roman civilization. Nemo evokes universal law in a multiethnic state, private property, and as a consequence, the constitution of the individuality of the human person; (c) Third phase: the contribution of Judeo-Christianity through an ethical revolution (charity surpasses justice) and the eschatological perspective provided by the Bible (the linear conception of time replaces cyclical time); (d) Fourth phase: the “papal revolution” of the eleventh through thirteenth centuries. The popes employed human reason, putting Greek science and Roman law at the service of biblical ethics and eschatology. According to Nemo, this involves a veritable synthesis between “Athens,” “Rome,” and “Jerusalem”; (e) Fifth phase: the accomplishment of liberal democracy through democratic revolutions and pluralism, which dominate science, politics, and economics. Nemo easily demonstrates the pertinence of his argument for Western Europe. These countries have all traversed these five phases in their respective histories. The United States was created during the fifth phase, but its culture has nevertheless developed in continuity with the European civilization. Nemo defines the geographical span of the West as including Western Europe and North America. He does not include Eastern Europe for obvious

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 36

25-09-2021 09:26:02

The Current “Religious” Context

37

reasons. The sociocultural fracture between the two regions since 1054 has endured until recent times, as the orthodox countries never knew a “papal revolution.”4 The development of secularization and the constitution of legal states were slower than in Western Europe. Nemo distinguishes between central and Eastern Europe. According to him, Poland, the Baltic countries, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia (which constitute central Europe) are countries whose culture is closer to the Western part of Europe than the orthodox countries. Notwithstanding, we include the eastern part of Europe in our study. This region’s recent history, while still separated from the evolution of the West for centuries following the constitution of an orthodox Christianity, rules out a separate treatment—especially since the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 and the requests of nations formerly dominated by communism to be integrated into the European Union.5 We thus add countries which are not part of the Western culture (Eastern Europe) and we also exclude from the study in this chapter countries which fully participate in this culture (the nations of North America). Though their cultural identities cannot be totally opposed, we thus separate Europe from North America.6 There have already been studies on the North American context; we need not repeat them. There are obvious cultural differences on either side of the Atlantic, but they are not more important than the differences which remain between several European countries. It is true that European churches have been more marked by deinstitutionalization, reduced memberships, and dwindling influence in public life. By comparison, American Christian communities remain very present in society and their cultural values are still more or less integrated into daily life. This book will thus analyze the religious situation of all countries which are part of the Western culture. North America is excluded for the pragmatic reason of limiting this book’s scope, while the countries of Eastern Europe will be included in our reflection. This space thus covers the twenty-seven countries of the EU, as well as Switzerland, Norway, Croatia, Serbia, BosniaHerzegovina, Albania, and Macedonia. DEFINING “RELIGION” This section presents the beginnings of a definition of the “religious” within the perspective of the sociology of religions which defines this chapter.7 Other philosophical (chapter 3) and theological (chapter 4) approaches will follow. All attempts at defining the “religious” phenomenon depend on the interpretive perspective chosen by the researcher. Its definition will evidently follow an ideal-type construction subject to continual revision, necessitating the adaptation of its initial model.8 In this way, the sociology of religions

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 37

25-09-2021 09:26:02

38

Chapter 2

formerly produced definitions of substantive and restrictive types while operating within a logic of the loss of the “religious.” This tendency has been reversed since the 1970s. Henceforth, the religious object is defined in a more extensive and inclusive perspective. The results of such analyses have thus moved toward accenting “a dispersed religion.” The process of delimiting the religious object will differ according to whether a study is interested in actors and institutions (in a first definition) or practices and beliefs (second definition). Sociologists subscribing to the first definition develop more comprehensive conceptions, but they suffer from excessive restriction of the field of research. Researchers in the second category avoid excessively limiting definitions of their object, but what they gain in openness is lost in clarity; the “religious” can now be perceived in nearly every social phenomenon. Oscillating between the substantive and functional approaches, the sociologist cannot help observing the indeterminacy of the structural condition of the sociology of religions.9 A third classical way remains: the “analogical religion” approach. This option puts a stop to the impossible quest for a definition of “religion” by comparing social objects which derive from the same field. However, the relief will be short lived, as the unification of different social fields leads directly to the disappearance of a specific “religious” field. This brings us right back to our starting point, the necessity of defining “religion.” But this must not be done too narrowly to maintain a helpful openness to future changes and evolutions in the fields analyzed. We will choose a definition of religion for this chapter in attempting a synthesis between two current registers in the sociology of religions: religion is a symbolic communication relative to a transcendent reality or a foundational appeal, generating practices and beliefs which fulfill different functions related to identity and integration. It thus marks one possible way of response to the uncertainties experienced by the human, both individually and collectively.10 EVOLUTION OF RELIGIONS DURING THE CONTEMPORARY PERIOD Before diving into sociological considerations of religious phenomena in Europe, we must briefly summarize the evolution of religions during the contemporary period (1750–2000). This historical overview will only broadly sketch of the relation between (Christian) religions and states, without examining the beliefs of various peoples (religious history) and religious events of minority groups. This historical evolution is commonly called “secularization,” because it is dominated by a progressively greater distance between two formerly united entities: states and religions. René Rémond, historian and member of the Académie française, will serve as our guide.11

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 38

25-09-2021 09:26:02

The Current “Religious” Context

39

Before the French Revolution A principal singularity of the European continent consists in its Christianization, occurring in in two waves and completed around 1000 AD. This common denominator of European identity—which characterizes every country without exception—should have been a uniting factor, if not for two decisive ruptures within Christendom which led to the creation of several religious parties. The first fracture took place between the Western and Eastern churches in the eleventh century, followed by the second separation between Roman Catholicism and the Protestant Churches resulting from the Reformations of the sixteenth century. From this point until the eve of the Revolution, Europe was split into at least three camps: one part of Europe remained Catholic; a second Europe was composed of Lutheran or Reformed states; and a third Europe refers to the Orthodox countries in the southeastern quarter of the continent. The conception of a sacral state which characterizes the political life of different monarchies ceded its place to confessional states after the events of the sixteenth century. This new political configuration was a consequence of the religious ruptures which set one Christian confession against another. Political and religious unity within a given territory was nevertheless upheld through religious adhesion to a given political space. This is captured in the ancient maxim cujus regio, ejus religio. The prince chose the religious confession of his subjects according to his religious affiliation. The state was thus confessional under the Ancien Regime.12 The regime’s religion and the faith of its subjects were identical. For obvious reasons, it was thus inconceivable to accept any kind of religious pluralism or to profess no faith at all: any breach of this principle was perceived as questioning the authority of the prince and the unity of the kingdom. For this reason, rulers fought against various dissidents who risked upsetting the stability of their kingdom. Several pockets of tolerance were formed during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (e.g., France under the Edict of Nantes and several Protestant countries), but this was still a long way from formal recognition of other Christian confessions within a given state. A first breach in this principle of state religion was opened by the French Revolution, which led to dissociating citizenship from religious confession through the adoption of the famous article X of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in August 1789. This article defended freedom of conscience and religion above all else. However, it importantly caused a rupture in the relation between religion and the state: religion was no longer considered as the principal foundation of national unity. When the legislative Assembly later adopted the instauration of a civil state, they crossed the threshold toward a first secularization, divesting the clergy of one of their social functions. Citizens were confronted with a differentiation from

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 39

25-09-2021 09:26:03

40

Chapter 2

the ecclesial community. The creation of a new entity, civil society, followed logically after.13 Evolution in the Nineteenth Century Controversies concerning “religion” occupied a central place throughout the nineteenth century. Several decades after the troubles of the Revolution, the old order had been partially reestablished; the religious question found no response which appeased the various actors it implicated. Much was at stake: ( 1) Should the state or its citizens be forced to have a religion? (2) There was a tension between the old conception of a confessional state and an individual religious conviction which might differ from the official religion. This was the tension between the unicity of a religion, vigorously upheld by adherents to a religious truth, and the plurality of Christian confessions in a nation. In various cases, freedom of worship was introduced by extension to other churches; or through state neutrality concerning religion; or again by the breaking of all relations between the state and various communities of worship. (3) In this period, civil law conformed to church law due to the confessional state system (and to canon law for the Catholic church). Several privileges for ecclesial institutions and clergy were added onto this law (e.g., exemption from military service and fiscal immunity). The principle of equality introduced into civil law meant that churches progressively lost their particular status. (4) This loss dovetailed with a discussion of society’s financing of religion. The question of financing religious services was intimately linked to the question of their independence. Whatever their relations with religion, governments were determined to maintain their grip on churches at all costs. The churches were forced to begrudgingly abdicate their tutelage of the state. Both parties sought to retain power of influence in this competition. Before the French Revolution, rulers generally retained the right to nominate church leaders. After this upheaval, churches instead distanced themselves from political power, adopting a critical stance. Freedom of nominating leaders was subsequently reclaimed by the Holy See. The progress of secularization entailed an increasingly distant relation between civil society and religion. This was the price paid by churches hoping to acquire greater independence in return. (5) Increasingly dispossessed of its monopoly on certain state functions, the Roman Catholic Church was forced to reorganize itself to reclaim its presence in society. It did so through the creation of numerous confessional institutions.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 40

25-09-2021 09:26:03

The Current “Religious” Context

41

(6) The identity between Christian morality and natural morality was still accepted without difficulty at the beginning of the nineteenth century, but fissures within this entity arose, culminating in an irreversible distance between the two norms. We are thinking here of the questions of dominical rest, the validity of conjugal unions, sexual morality, and funerals. The Roman Catholic Church primarily aimed to maintain its influence through its vision of an integral religion. Its judgment on government actions was generally not appreciated. Protestant Churches, by contrast, refrained from adopting such a rigid position.14 Of course, conflicts resulting from these challenges outlasted the nineteenth century. The permanent elements of this evolution put churches and states in competition, with each vying power over the other. The apparent confrontation of the two protagonists in the political field must not hide the ideological conflict at its origin: on the one hand, the churches justified their position through reference to an absolute truth; on the other, the progressive forces based their demands on the state sovereignty already extant from the time of monarchies. This sovereign tradition, the superiority of secular power over the churches, found its extension after the Revolution: states counted policing religious communities among their competencies, and citizens progressively moved toward claiming freedom of conscience, even if this no longer went together with freedom of worship. This dominant current was opposed to carrying on the old tradition of unconditional fidelity to the church. This latter claimed precisely that it had the right to continue directing public morality and to enlarge its independence vis-à-vis secular power. This desire for a thoroughgoing overhaul of church-state relations and a return to a pre-Revolutionary situation around 1815 was never realized, despite the institution of officially recognized religious communities in France for some time. The restoration of old conditions turned out to be a utopia unable to overthrow the changes already consummated in the relation of state and religion. This did not prevent defenders of the Roman church tradition from acting powerfully throughout the nineteenth century, taking their inspiration from Ultramontanism and systematically distinguishing themselves by their intransigent attitude.15 Having discussed the wagers of the religious question and permanent factors of its evolution, we are now ready to take up the task of describing the transformations which occurred during this first stage of secularization.16 This process took at least a century for the different European states, starting with the dissociation of church and state, and ending with a separation of religion and society. The starting point for all countries was a confessional state, which implied privileged relations with a Christian confession. Two major mutations intervened during this era: the principle of the confessional state

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 41

25-09-2021 09:26:03

42

Chapter 2

was abandoned, and the state went from a hostile attitude to an increasingly liberal position regarding religions. This process resulted in the creation of two separate entities. But it went through several stages to get there. Rémond summarizes them in three basic phases: during the first phase, the shackles binding freedom of conscience had to be eliminated. In other words, various discriminations against those who did not subscribe to the state religion had to be suppressed. This concession to recognizing the equality of every citizen set the second phase in motion, which involved an ever-clearer distinction between religion and state as visible in the dissociation of religious and civil acts. These changes were inscribed in laws which henceforth established two levels of belonging—to a religious community on the one hand, and to civil society on the other. This evolution was notably radicalized in France (1905) during the third phase, moving toward the state’s total neutrality toward religions and its retreat from the religious domain altogether. But the French case represents the most radical extreme. Other states did not follow this path of laicization, but each nation set out on the path of secularization in its own way and at its own rhythm. Evolution in the Twentieth Century The two great traditions which had forged the mentalities of the preceding century continued to model minds during the twentieth century, though certainly to a lesser extent. On one side were churches hoping to retake lost ground, even on the eve of the Second World War. On the other side were governments acting according to a sovereign and confessional-state logic. Protestant Churches remained dependent on the state without too much conflict, and a great number of Catholic countries lived in unity with the Roman church until the second half of the twentieth century. But the contingencies of history overturned the positions of both sides through the experience of totalitarianisms. The Roman Catholic Church was forced to change its position after its painful encounter with the third Reich and the growth of communism. It thus opened itself to ideas which it had hitherto fought against, such as liberal democracy, the recognition of human rights, and religious freedom. Countries under Protestant influence generally ceded more quickly to these aspirations because their churches were quicker to integrate the ideas of rationalism and liberalism into their theologies, thus losing their ambition of a mission to society as a whole.17 Having irremediably lost their position of power, the churches instead benefited from a new advantage: the upside to secularization in the second half of the twentieth century was a new freedom for the churches in their

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 42

25-09-2021 09:26:03

The Current “Religious” Context

43

independence from the states.18 They could reorganize, work in tandem, and make decisions without their state imposing its interests. This evolution had hardly finished at the end of the previous century. Today, relations between states and religions in Europe seem relatively peaceful, with each party finally recognizing that this historical evolution was for the better. States today respect the independence of the churches, and Christian confessions recognize the positive effects of secularization. This “friendly” secularization does not mean that the old antagonisms do not raise their heads here or there following some political event. The arrangements at the end of this second phase of secularization might vary between the French model—which, despite its radicality, managed to establish new relations between the state and religious authorities—and a more robust recognition of certain religious communities in other states. New questions are posed following the immigration of populations belonging to non-Christian religions, especially Islam. The process of secularization has shaped the political conceptions of states and modeled new relations between states and religions. It affected the individual as well: its influence has totally affected personal behavior since the 1968 era. This is visible in matters of divorce, abortion, and homosexuality.19 After two centuries of secularization in Europe, we note a certain agreement between the states in their treatment of “religions.” All parties accept the separation between individual religious convictions and civil society. The state must adopt a position of strict neutrality concerning religious matters. Christian confessions and other religious expressions must be treated as strictly equal. Laicity is one of the constitutive elements of the rule of law. At its first appearance, it was characterized by a negative attitude, fighting against religions; it then adopted a more neutral position as the polemics between them ran out of steam. At present, one can catch glimpses of a more positive laicity leaving a greater place for religions in public space. Are we on the verge of a third threshold of laicity20 or a mediating laicity,21 as two French authors argue? From this point onward, interpreting the political history between “religion” and the state must definitively give way to a sociological analysis of the current religious situation. We will present four European countries. Each of the four is characterized by a distinct religious identity, but also represents a larger space: France represents the “Catholic countries”; the United Kingdom (or rather, Great Britain), the “Protestant countries”; and Romania, the “Orthodox countries.” The New States of the Federal Republic of Germany (formerly East Germany) present an atypical and particularly interesting case of dechristianization. The “representativity” of these four cases in no way implies a homogeneous religious situation among countries of the same confessional kind. It should be understood within a comparative perspective among countries sharing a similar religious tradition.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 43

25-09-2021 09:26:03

44

Chapter 2

THE RELIGIOUS CONTEXT OF FRANCE France belongs to a larger category of European countries forged by Roman Catholicism. These countries did not welcome the transformative movements stemming from the Protestant Reformations of the sixteenth century in the same way as other European regions. France shares a long history with these other countries in the “Roman Catholic” zone, but its distinct historical path leading to a rather radical separation between political power and the religious sphere makes France a singular case.22 This process, dubbed “laicization,” is a regional variant of the secularization model. This latter explains church-state relations from their initial unity to their separation into autonomous entities. This evolution began in the sixteenth century and came to completion in most Western states in the twentieth century. For “Protestant” countries this change was often less aggressive, as these nascent Protestant Churches derived some of their legitimacy from regional political authorities. In the case of France, this transformation was more dramatic and marked by long conflicts. The Roman Catholic Church was not prepared to give up its strong position in society after the Revolution. Intransigent Catholicism born in the nineteenth century still militated for the submission of societies to the Roman Catholic Church, fighting against the centrifugal forces of modernity. On this foundation, integral or social Catholicism later developed at the end of the same century, abandoning direct confrontation in favor of penetrating society by the Christian idea.23 Poulat describes this conflict with a triangular model, with the Roman Catholic Church, the bourgeoisie (especially its liberal wing), and socialism serving as three antagonists in the triangle.24 This tension can also be explained with a simplified model of “two Frances” rivaling each other, with one representing anticlerical “lay France,” and the other identified with clerical “Catholic France.”25 It is useful to analyze both sides of this history with their respective compositions, and to discern new forms of religiosity. We cannot approach French religious history in the second half of the twentieth century without briefly evoking preceding events. The 1905 law separating church and state was the culmination of the long struggle referred to above. It put an end to the Napoleon Concordat, a system with a quasiofficial religion (as in Napoleon’s famous saying that “Catholicism is the religion of the majority of Frenchmen”). Jean Baubérot, historian of laicity, perceives in this event the second threshold of laicization.26 The Roman Catholic Church had to adjust to this substantial loss of power. It did so only with difficulty around 1924, the year often viewed as the second rallying of Catholics to the Republic.27 Certainly, the Catholics were delivered from this visceral opposition to the state, which afforded them a more constructive attitude. But the same period was also molded by conservative tendencies

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 44

25-09-2021 09:26:04

The Current “Religious” Context

45

among the Catholic hierarchy. The Roman church fought against the various expressions of cultural modernity. Rome condemned both the experience of Sillon in 191028 and that of Action française in 1926,29 asserting in both of these rather distinct cases the priority of the spiritual over the temporal. The First World War allowed the “two Frances” to come together in their time of trial. Clergymen fought in the trenches alongside laypersons. The defensive tradition of the position of the Roman Catholic Church could not help changing after the second rallying. It assimilated to its new position in society, and its behavior henceforth operated according to an offensive logic. From 1927 onward, this was the case with the establishment of a new, second Action catholique. This time, the review was “specialized”—that is, a Catholic association specifically targeted each segment of society for apostolic outreach. The 1920s and 1930s saw the appearance of various indications of a renewal in Catholic thought—notably through the emergence of new leading intellectuals such as Jacques Maritain and Marie-Dominique Chenu. This renewal persisted throughout the Second World War. On the side of the Reformed Church, we must mention its restored unity in 1938 after sixty-six years of fighting between “orthodox” and “liberal” factions.30 Contemporary Religious History, 1945–1968 Most Catholics in France were warned of the danger of Nazism and in no way supported the occupying government during the Second World War. This reserve was even radicalized into an outright opposition, taking the form of engaged resistance on several occasions. By contrast, the inhabitants of the Southern zone (including Catholics) largely rallied to Marshal Pétain. Though France belonged to the conquering side after the war, she had suffered the consequences of several years of occupation. The time had come to reconstruct the country, especially economically; the famished population had to be fed. The economy took off around 1953 as demographic renewal made for an increasingly youthful country. The second rallying did not manage to settle all contentions between France and the Vatican. After 1936, their relations were reduced to a minimum. After the birth of the fourth Republic, the situation changed.31 The new Republic left an important place for the Christians who occupied various functions in political (as well as cultural and social) life. The foundation of the Mouvement Républicain Populaire (MRP) in 1944 put an end to divisions between Christians over questions of political engagement. This party defined itself as non-confessional, but of Christian inspiration. It drew its forces from various Catholic movements and clearly affirmed its attachment to the Republic, as its name indicates. Several well-known personalities committed to the party from the start, helping to mobilize others. In 1946, the MRP

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 45

25-09-2021 09:26:04

46

Chapter 2

became the premier political party in France. A new generation rose to power, assuming ministerial responsibilities. Its influence remained decisive during the first legislature, but then progressively lost confidence until its complete disappearance in 1967. Throughout the most recent global conflict, the ideal of constructing a “new Christendom” within French Catholicism completely dissolved. But this should not distract from a parallel renewal of religious life. Opinions were certainly divided as to the 1943 appearance of Godin and Daniel’s booklet La France, pays de mission? (France: A Country of Mission?), on the one hand, and the pilgrimage of four statues of Notre-Dame de Boulogne, carried throughout the cities and towns of France until 1948, on the other.32 Godin and Daniel’s book represented a current emphasizing the massive dechristianization of the population. According to the authors, only a massive missionary movement could counter such an evolution. But the pilgrimage which sparked a working-class religious fervor contradicted this negative diagnosis. It is true that the 1940s saw the birth of innumerable initiatives which often translated into the creation of institutions. A few examples: the Mission de France in 1941; Sources chrétiennes, a collection of patristic texts, and the journals Jeunesse de l’Église (Youth of the Church) in 1942; and the Mission de Paris in 1943. This religious optimism was amplified further still after the Liberation, as is clearly visible in the fifty-eighth congress of the Union des oeuvres catholiques de France in Besançon in 1946. The various Catholic organizations managed to gather roughly 3 million children and youth in 1946 before their decline in the 1950s. Semaines sociales (Social Weeks), a kind of itinerant university, reached many people, and notably intellectuals. This institution had great success from the 1930–1960, decisively permeating the social Catholicism of the era. In the agricultural world, Jeunesse Agricole Catholique (JAC; “Catholic Agricultural Youth”) played a determining role in the transformation of old practices into modern agriculture. Catholicism partially restructured itself, notably through its “successes” in the rural world and among elites. The worker world—targeted above all by the outreach efforts of Jeunesse Ouvrière Chrétienne (JOC; Young Christian Worker), but also by all the ideological efforts of Communists—only partially allowed itself to be taken in by the Christian message. The mediatized experiences of worker-priests, who had abandoned their priestly habits in favor of factory worker’s garments, concerned only a minority of progressive clergy wanting to follow the missionary “logic” of the era to its conclusion—that is, a real lived “presence” among workers. For some of these precursors, this also implied a certain political engagement. The experience of these priests was only one initiative among others in a “progressive” direction within the French Catholic Church. Unable to justly interpret these initiatives, Rome worried about the doctrinal direction taken by the French Church.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 46

25-09-2021 09:26:05

The Current “Religious” Context

47

The crisis between Rome and the local church broke out from 1950–1954. Various sanctions were leveled on the “reformers”: managers had to quit their posts, reviews were forced out of print, and worker-priests no longer went into factories at all due to new conditions imposed by Rome in 1953. Not all initiatives were suspended; Mission de France, for example, obtained official recognition in 1954. But it was a rather gloomy time for the militant and progressive side of the Roman Catholic Church: threats from Rome continued until after the election of the new Pope Jean XXIII in 1960. Clergy recruitment was in continual decline after 1950. The announcement of the Vatican II council in 1959 came as a great surprise. Vatican II mobilized all local churches, and bishops were conferred to several work sessions between 1962–1965. The council went far beyond the confines of the Roman Catholic Church. It resulted in the publishing of sixteen decrees after long preparations in different commissions. French theologians (Henri de Lubac, Jean Daniélou and Yves Congar, to name the most prominent) greatly contributed to the creation of these texts. We could even say that Vatican II coincided with the zenith of French (Catholic) theology in the twentieth century. Without question, the council drew nearer to its era through a change of tone in the Catholic hierarchy, but also through theological developments. The post-council context still did nothing to slow the general progress of secularization. Church youth movements underwent crises from 1956 onward, losing their hold on their generation; innovative theologies introduced secularization into the very heart of their system of thought; the Christian union CFTC abandoned its confessional affiliations in 1964; and the parochial spirit declined further in the 1960s. In short, the euphoria sparked by the council was followed by disenchantment. The crisis of the Catholic church coincided with the larger society-wide crisis brutally manifest in the student revolts of May 1968. It was preceded by the crisis of student movements, sparking their division and radicalization. The student revolt came as a surprise to a France which otherwise seemed to be doing fine (materially, at least). The place of Christian ideas was very limited in this movement. The protests, inspired by extreme leftist perspectives, brought the foundations and institutions of society into question. May 1968 remained graven in the minds of French society, kicking its accelerating secularization up a notch. Postwar French Protestantism was increasingly influenced by dialectical theology and its leading light, Karl Barth. North American theologians such as Paul Tillich and John Cobb saw some liberal renewal as well. After 1960, political theologies and theologies of the world marginalized dialectical theology. In 1950, various Protestant youth movements united into the Alliance des Équipes Unionistes (AEU; Alliance of Unionist Groups). These movements sought further independence vis-à-vis Protestant Churches. Like their

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 47

25-09-2021 09:26:05

48

Chapter 2

Catholic homologues, they became increasingly political. Shaken by various crises, they lost many militants. In the past, these movements had played a determining role in recruiting future Protestant leaders; this was no longer the case after 1960. Intra-Protestant diversity was significant, but from the sixties onward, Protestants of various churches managed to come together. Still, institutional unity among Lutherans and Reforms was not yet possible.33 Contemporary Religious History, 1970–2006 The two decades from 1970–1990 were marked by a fundamental change in religious history. In the eyes of many, Vatican II was an apotheosis in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. The church’s aggiornamento happened under the impulse of the council. But despite its efforts to adapt to its times, it suffered the consequences of the societal transformation which followed the events of 1968. Some still saw the workings of a spiritual turning in the mid-1970s. But events would uncover the decomposition of Christianity within the churches, as much on the Roman Catholic side as on the Protestant side. The politization of ecclesial movements was at its peak, with politics sacralized by Christians themselves. This was to the detriment of the properly religious character of these organizations. This change of direction overturned older modes of working. Militant Christians had long abandoned “Apostolic conquest” in favor of a presence in society. But even this attitude still seemed suspect: all that remained was silent listening. Different ways of transmitting the faith were thus radically modified, but even this could not counteract the global crisis which had come upon the Catholic church. Rather than reflecting the spiritual renewal which its instigators hoped for, the “silence” of witnesses and the change of methods translated a church’s crisis of faith. The holy year 1975 saw the influx of 12 million pilgrims to Rome, and the charismatic Renewal in the same year obtained official recognition by Paul VI. New communities were born shortly afterward. Rome hoped at all costs to regain control, seeking to stem the general decline. In December 1975, the Pope published his apostolic exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi. This document was undoubtedly the most important declaration following Vatican II. The Pope aimed to mobilize the entire church in an evangelization effort, and above all to change its methods, advocating visible witness and clear verbal announcement of the Gospel. He also aimed to correct the attitude of a Catholicism excessively open to the world.34 The destabilization of the foundations of the Roman Catholic Church throughout these years considerably weakened the institution: priestly ordinations were in freefall (646 priests in 1965; 99 priests in 1977); dominical practice fell considerably from 1975 onward. The magisterium hardly regained its footing after the publication of the encyclical Humanae vitae.35

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 48

25-09-2021 09:26:06

The Current “Religious” Context

49

The year 1975 cannot be considered as a “spiritual turning.” Churches were swept up in the general current of civilizational crisis. The practices of the “practicing” faithful continued to drop: only 8–10% still went to mass, compared to 30% in 1960. French children were baptized less and less: 52% in 2000, as opposed to 91.7% in 1958. Religious marriage was also in decline following a notable increase in divorce, remarriage, and non-Catholic religious marriages. However, religious funerals–the last rite of passage–were in high demand. Almost 80% of French people allowed themselves to be buried by the Roman Catholic Church.36 Religious teaching via catechism was also affected by the decline. Twenty-five percent of twelve-year-old children professed their faith in 2000. The lack of priests, along with their general aging, caused 3000 dominical assemblies to emerge in the absence of priests (ADAP—assemblée dominicale en l’absence de prêtre) since 1980. Dioceses were forced to restructure, leaving sixty of these ecclesial entities in 2003. The number of parishes has diminished by roughly half since 1980, with 19,133 in 2002. These suppressions and reconstructions shook the parish system at the turn of the century. As for the clergy, their numbers continue to fall. Their regression has only increased since 1975: in twenty-six years, the number of secular priests dropped by half (with 17,205 in 2001). The number of monks and nuns in apostolic congregations drastically diminished. Contemplative orders better resisted this tendency, while certain large male orders recruited more after the crisis of the seventies. Annual priestly ordinations stabilized around 120 men on average between 1986 and 2000. The aging of priests, monks, and nuns is worrying, and the distribution of young priests among dioceses is unequal. More and more laypersons are commissioned by their bishop by means of a sending letter. In 2001, 4,500 pastoral activity leaders were employed. The diaconate has only slowly reestablished itself in France after Vatican II, attaining numbers of 1,661 deacons (often married men) in 2001. The religious culture of the French people has been diminishing for at least twenty years; the erosion of the Christian press partially contributes to this phenomenon. French youth are finding their way toward the Catholic church less and less: only 6% practiced “religion” in 2001. Declarations of youth in surveys concerning the content of the Christian faith have become increasingly hazy. By contrast, we can note a slight increase in belief in general and in God in particular since the beginning of the third millennium. Among practitioners, women remain more numerous than men. But the gap between the sexes is closing, both regarding church attendance and declarations concerning the content of the faith. This fact could be due to resistance to Catholic morality, the number of divorces, or again, to the general promotion of women in society. Loss of interest in churches was reinforced by the effects of various protest movements. These movements were born following the rejection of the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 49

25-09-2021 09:26:06

50

Chapter 2

rigid position of the Roman Catholic Church after 1968. Like these movements, theologians sought greater leeway in regard to the magisterium. The renewal of French bishops and authoritative texts in this church led to a certain appeasement of opinions beginning in 1980. The project of the left (which came to power in 1981) to create one public and laic institution of National Education was not imposed due to numerous protests from French society. A segment of influential Catholic journals was not in sync with the magisterial renewal and fought against the “new evangelization” advocated by Rome since 1985. Several “affairs” within the church were widely broadcast, including the bicentennial of the Revolution, and the Drewermann (1993–1994), Gaillot (1994–1995), and Clovis (1996) “affairs.” Critique of this church did not stop, neither after 1989 (the fall of the communist empire), nor after the end of the scandals mentioned above. But a new generation of bishops who had grown up during the years of protest had come to power, further identifying with the “new evangelization.” There was also a reflux toward the “spiritual”; new congregations were born seeking contemplation, and charismatic renewal manifested itself as promoting a future awakening. Within French Protestantism, the time was ripe to seek a new position for the “’68 generation” during the seventies. Lutheran and Reformed churches managed to practice shared communion after the Concord of Leuenberg (1973). But this agreement should not hide the counterattacks of 1968; just as on the Catholic side of things, religious practice and Protestant youth movements collapsed. This evolution generated tensions of opinion among the various factions. The identity crisis evidently reached the pastoral corps as well. Despite the media success of several first-order Protestant politicians during the eighties, in 1988 Baubérot inquired into the possible death of Protestantism. French Protestantism’s ecumenical strategy found itself in the impasse of the confessional status quo.37 The Protestant movement recovered some stability during the following decade, during which pastoral ministry was feminized. Protestantism remained in a precarious state at the dawn of the third millennium, even while a decrease in its deceleration can be observed. Regular religious practice remains inferior to 10%. The old “Protestant regions” have lost their specific identity and Protestantism in rural areas is decreasing due to the migration of their inhabitants toward more urban zones. Protestant communities increasingly find themselves in a situation of extreme dispersion. Mixed marriages, the loss of confessional identities—these are several reasons which add up to explain its persistent weaknesses. By contrast, the Evangelical current of Protestantism shows noteworthy vitality; its numbers have quadrupled since 1945. Compared to other Protestants, it is still a minority current in terms of membership numbers, but not in terms of the number of local churches.38 Evangelicals have historical connections with the radical wing of the Reformation and with the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 50

25-09-2021 09:26:06

The Current “Religious” Context

51

various waves of Awakenings. They are partly the fruit of missionary efforts and are increasingly at ease in the vast networks of the global Evangelical movement, insistently claiming a place in public space after a time of substantial withdrawal. Their current theological challenges concern efforts for developing a more visible intra-Protestant ecumenism, their position regarding the World Council of Churches, and their embedded position within “emotional Protestantism.”39 Religions It is difficult to find exact statistics concerning “religious” matters because the laic state does not publish such statistics. Nevertheless, various surveys conducted allow us to delimit the current religious field.40 (1) Catholicism is becoming a minority in France. In 1981, 71% of the French population declared itself Catholic; this number remained at 53% in 1999, but only 51% in 2007. The geographic distribution of Catholics in 2007 compared to the overall population does not show much difference, with the exception of the region Île de France.41 But practices may differ from one region to another, or even within a given region. If we employ the “Boulard” methodology of the 1950s,42 we observe few changes in relation to configurations of French “religious geography” compared with preceding decades.43 Evidently, the average rate of practice over the last fifty years has dropped vertiginously. According to a 2007 survey, analyses of the identity of Catholics in relation to the overall population produce the following results: more women and less men go to this church compared to the national average; retired persons are overrepresented and youth are underrepresented; the largest group within the church is formed by those aged fifty and over (56%). If we closely examine the content of the faith of French Catholics, we perceive the increasingly large gap separating church dogma from the opinions of adherents: half of Catholics do not believe in God or doubt his existence; four-fifths define God as a force, and only one-fifth as a personal God; roughly half do not know exactly what comes after death; and only 37% believe in the dogma of the trinity. The Catholics surveyed do not agree with the church magisterium: 81% support priestly marriage, 79% look favorably on female ordination, and only 7% agree with the affirmation that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true religion. Despite the critical attitude toward the magisterium, it is surprising that most Catholics have a favorable opinion of the church (76%) and of Pope Benedict XVI (71%). Lenoir explains these contrasting results through a double movement: Catholics are increasingly wed to the values of our

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 51

25-09-2021 09:26:07

52

Chapter 2

modern societies, and simultaneously bind themselves to the identifying symbols of their church.44 Lambert observed a rapprochement between the values of practicing Catholics and those of persons “without religion” in 2000. He compares the evolution of relations between mores and religious options, observing a regression in the permissive attitude of those “without religion” and increasing acceptance of divorce and homosexuality among practicing Catholics.45 Like Danièle HervieuLéger,46 Jean-Pierre Bastian highlights the diminishing influence of a formerly majority church in its evolution toward a minority organization. He detects behavior suggestive of a minority group among certain state churches in Europe and in the French Roman Catholic Church in particular. For example, Bastian points to the conversionist behavior of the Roman Catholic Church—formerly denounced by the hierarchy, but today accepted, and even systematically supported.47 ( 2) Muslims form the second group in the religious field. They came into the country in waves of immigration during the twentieth century, whether through economic migration or as an outcome of various wars (e.g., soldiers of colonial troops of both wars, the Harkis serving under the French flag during the Algerian war). Part of this population has successfully integrated; other immigrants have seen their children make very little progress up the social ladder of the Republic. The Grand Mosque of Paris was built in 1926 as a sign of gratitude for the sacrifices of Muslim soldiers during the First World War. After 1967, workers demanded the opening of prayer rooms in residence halls and in businesses, which was officially approved in 1976. Two years later, mosques and prayer rooms numbered around 100. The number of persons attached to Islam is difficult to discern; estimations range from 2 or 3 million (1997) to 8 million. Many specialists support a figure of 5 to 6 million Muslims in 2004. A 2001 survey reveals that 36% of Muslims surveyed are practicing; 42% declare themselves believers. The remaining 22% are split between those who define themselves uniquely by their origins (16%), those who adhere to another religion (1%) or no religion (5%). These varying observations demonstrate that circumcision and fasting for Ramadan are widely practiced. Of course, practice of this religion varies among different nationalities, as well as among different generations (particularly notable among children of foreigners born in France). The vast majority of Muslims in France belong to the Sunni school. Most of the Muslim population—roughly 4 million people—originates in Maghreb, followed by Turks and those of Sub-Saharan Africa. To date, efforts at representation and unity among Muslims run up against the absence of a clergy in Sunni communities, against the impossibility of the Mosque of Paris (mostly under Algerian influence) to unite all Muslims within itself, and against

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 52

25-09-2021 09:26:07

The Current “Religious” Context

53

varying interests and origins of Muslims themselves. The laic French state is torn between a strict observance of the constitution, and indirect financial support for pragmatic reasons, primarily for the construction of mosques. It occasionally prefers this kind of support to strict laicity to bypass more or less opaque subventions coming from Muslim majority countries. Different spiritual as well as political currents traverse Islam. Mainstream Islam is dominant in France after the falling rates of practice which generally followed immigration. Muslim “missionaries” of various tendencies try to reanimate the “faith” of those too tempted by Western materialism over the last several decades. Islamism is regularly revived by international events, preachers, and radical movements. Two networks share the fight to represent the entirety of Islam in France: the Fédération Nationale Musulmane de France (FNMF) around the mosque of Évry, who put themselves in an awkward situation in relation to the Mosque of Paris. This federation primarily includes Turkish and Moroccan associations. The Union des Organisations Islamiques de France (UOIF) unites several large mosques and associations and is close to the Egyptian Frères musulmans (Muslim brotherhood). It is favorable toward laicity, but would like to make several adjustments to the current arrangement. This organization manages to assemble great crowds at its annual main gathering. The Mosque of Paris fights for an “open” Islam, seeking (like other federations) to rally as many provincial mosques as possible. In terms of the number of Muslims and the number of practitioners, Islam holds a solid place as France’s second major religion.48 (3) The religious field of Protestantism is varied as suggested by its theological nature, inscribed as it is in its tradition following the Reformation. One million French persons adhere to the various Protestant denominations: 650,000 in the Lutheran and Reformed denominations, 150,000 in Evangelical denominations, 200,000 in Pentecostal and charismatic churches, and 50,000 in so-called “ethnic” churches. Various theological currents which once were clearly circumscribed no longer necessarily correspond to denominational frontiers. On the institutional side, 250,000 out of the 650,000 persons in the Lutheran and Reformed churches are part of the two concordatory churches of Alsace-Moselle.49 Protestants are generally united in the Fédération Protestante de France (FPF, founded in 1909) or in the Fédération Évangélique de France (FEF, founded in 1969). More recently, an informal forum of exchange among evangelicals of every tendency has been created. The Conseil National des Évangéliques de France (CNEF), which includes representatives of Evangelical denominations from both federations as well as from independent churches, has held meetings since January 2002. Accounting for their number, dissemination, theological and

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 53

25-09-2021 09:26:07

54

Chapter 2

institutional diversity, and emphasis on the local church (congregationalist ecclesiology), Protestants remain a minority with limited visibility. These characteristics hardly lend themselves to ideal coverage in the media. We can distinguish four sociological “types” within contemporary Protestantism today: (a) An inherited “cultural” Protestantism, connected to its history by behavior oriented toward the past. This Protestantism is aging and its churches are losing their members. There has been a rupture in this Protestantism’s transmission for at least a generation. (b) An Evangelical-type “conversionist” Protestantism. Often grouped in professing churches, these are persons who campaign for their faith. (c) Finally, an “ethnic” Protestantism, concentrated in large urban centers and proposing a place of identity to foreigners. Despite the growth of “conversionist” Protestantism and its efforts to reintegrate and reactivate its presence in public space, Protestantism in general has not managed to remedy its “deficits of institutionality, of sacrality, and of universality.”50 Sébastien Fath has examined Evangelical Christians more closely, defining six different “milieux” based on an expanded schema from Willaime and Baubérot. Fath distinguishes two overall typologies (“pietist-orthodox” and “Pentecostal-charismatics”), each encompassing three milieux. The first group includes: (a) The pietist-social milieu (in which personal piety accompanies social engagement); (b) The milieu of biblical orthodoxy (in which concern for orthodox biblical interpretation is a chief priority); and (c) The ascetic-rigorist milieu (in which orthodoxy is shifted onto rigorous behavior in conformity with the community). In the second typology: (a) The first Pentecostal-ascetic milieu is close to the preceding milieu, with the exception of its specifically Pentecostal character; (b) A charismatic movement of personal flourishing maintains an Evangelical identity, but re-centers everything on personal well-being. It thus bears commonality with other religious or secular tendencies of contemporary society;

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 54

25-09-2021 09:26:07

The Current “Religious” Context

55

(c) The “magic” charismatic milieu with its emphasis on the extraordinary is situated at the extremity of the Evangelical movement. In the conclusion of his study, Fath highlights the fragility, proliferation, and dynamism of the movement, which has definitively left its generally French enclosure and moved toward a “network” type functioning on geographical, denominational, institutional, and theological levels.51 (4) One-quarter of the Jewish population in France was a victim of Nazi barbarism. From 1955–1965 large numbers of Jews leaving Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, and primarily Algeria arrived in France. Consequently, the Jewish population doubled in number, attaining half a million at the end of the 1960s. The data concerning the distribution of Jews within French territory has since changed. Most Jews have settled near the Mediterranean shoreline and in the French capital. Faced with their extraordinary growth, some communities had to develop a strong ability to welcome their newly arrived members. These arrivals also transformed dominant currents within the spiritual tradition. Ashkenazi Jews ceded their majority status to Sephardic Jews from the Mediterranean periphery. Today the Jewish community encompasses 500,000 to 600,000 persons. Various Jewish associations are grouped together within the Conseil Représentatif des Israélites de France (CRIF), founded in 1943. Since Napoleon, religious communities have been structured by a consistorial system. The central Consistory handles all questions linked to worship.52 (5) Eastern Christians constitute a group of roughly 750,000 persons, with both orthodox and Armenian Christians each numbering around 300,000 and Catholics of various orthodox rites numbering around 150,000.53 (6) Hinduism is represented by roughly 150,000 persons in France. This population is also constituted through immigration. Buddhism is currently well-recognized in France, as is generally the case throughout the West. This attraction can be explained through westerners’ relative ignorance of this religion and a selective use allowing for a veritable religious “bricolage” in its appropriation. There is some leeway in these figures between numbers advanced by the media (600,000), the number of refugees from Southeast Asia in France (400,000), and actual proponents (13,000). Media coverage of this religion impedes research within this religious field and obscures its constituency.54 (7) The last group presented in our study describes very diverse microminorities with a Christian heritage (Jehovah’s witnesses, Mormons, Christian Scientists, Catholic dissidents) or more distant from Christianity (the Unification Church, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Bahai, The Church of Scientology, the Raëlian movement).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 55

25-09-2021 09:26:07

56

Chapter 2

Jehovah’s witnesses certainly form the largest of these groups with roughly 120,000 adherents. Other groups include only several hundred persons. Freemasonry, a movement of initiates, must be distinguished from these groups; yet though it declares itself to be a lay movement, we cannot exclude it from a certain “ideological religiosity.” In 2004 there were roughly 140,000 freemasons in France grouped in ten movements.55 Beliefs Beyond the numbers of “religious” adherents, we conclude our survey of France with a glance at trends among believers. (1) Catholic Christianity, clearly the majority Christian denomination in France, is experiencing a substantial loss of members. Several important divisions took place over liturgical practices (around 1970), religious belonging (around 1975–1976), and the practice of prayer and belief in God (around 1977–1978). Religious practice, membership in a church, and faith in God have been declining for several decades. In 2007, 51% of French citizens still called themselves Catholic. Protestants are a minority (3%); the actual state of their church is only partially represented by survey data.56 At present, the growth of the Evangelical current and “ethnic” churches cannot compensate for intra-Protestant erosion, to say nothing of the erosion of Christianity in general. The disintegration of the abundance of Catholic Christianity in France continues.57 (2) The surveys of the European Values Study (EVS in 1981, 1990, and 1999)58 clearly demonstrate the weakening not only of institutional religion, but also of “religious sentiment” in general. But the results of responses concerning beliefs must be nuanced. The mismatch is noticeable when considering belief in God, a “personal God,” the importance given to God in general, and belief in sin. Increases have been observed concerning the following questions: faith in “a spirit or life force,” certainty of life after death in general and associated beliefs in particular (hell, paradise, reincarnation). The results for youths aged eighteen– twenty-nine are notably different from the overall average. In this group, “religious” decline is moderate, especially when analyzing the general criteria of religiosity. Certainly, belonging to a religion and attendance at worship services decline from one decade to another when considering variations within the same age group. But young people today believe that the church can offer responses to spiritual needs more than ten years ago. They are also more convinced of the importance of ceremonies (baptism, marriage, and religious funerals). Their appreciation for such ceremonies even exceeds the average of all surveyed. Compared

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 56

25-09-2021 09:26:07

The Current “Religious” Context

57

to 1981, youths believe in God more (but this belief is not so much in a “personal God”!) and in “a kind of spirit or life force.” Beliefs concerning the afterlife (and above all the notion of hell) are strongly growing, surpassing even the general average of those surveyed in 1999. Yves Lambert also notes reduced differences of opinion between the sexes, as well as between different levels of education and different social milieux. The same trend also applies for the rapprochement of religious ideas among those “without religion” and “atheists” on the one hand and Catholics on the other. The former increasingly believe in a life after death (notably those “without religion” in general, but young “convinced atheists” as well), while “religiosity” is in decline or remains steady among the latter. The same observation applies in the rapprochement of morals between the two categories. Being Catholic and being atheist simply no longer mean what they used to: the one group is opening to more diffuse beliefs and moving away from doctrine, while the other is open to belief in a more general manner. But these trends do not result in increased religious belonging. We are thus confronted with a “believing without belonging.” These persons who practice religious “off-roading” (according to Lambert’s metaphor) are also partly curious regarding the exploration of different religions. These “hikers” (according to Lambert) find themselves among Catholics who practice little, among youths, and among the most educated. The sociologist highlights that the transmission of faith depends primarily on the religious position of both parents. Indeed, this transmission most frequently did not happen, and the few conversions toward a religion are too insignificant to appear in statistics. Lambert juxtaposes his observations with ideal-typical figures described by Hervieu-Léger.59 According to Lambert, the figure of the “pilgrim” is more common, while that of the “convert” remains rare in reality.60 (3) Religious surveys likewise foreground the existence of a very large group—a group covering one-third of the French population—who define themselves as “without religion.” The 1999 EVS survey produced the figure of 43%, while the CSA survey published in 2007 proffers 31% for this precise group. Those “without religion” thus occupy second place in the classification of “religious” groups, just behind Catholics and before Muslims. While remaining prudent as to the attribution of such a self-definition, the non-religiosity of this group is worthy of careful consideration: there might nevertheless be some “religious” elements to flush out in this universe. (Research must take great care to dissect the opinions of this group.)61 (4) An increase in belief is particularly visible in alternative beliefs and in the mystical-esoteric universe. These domains deserve greater attention from researchers. It seems that this kind of belief is on the rise, as

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 57

25-09-2021 09:26:08

58

Chapter 2

highlighted in surveys from 1982, 1988, and 1993. Comparing different beliefs of this kind brings out a rise in this “faith” in nine out of ten kinds. By contrast, comparing data from 1982 and 2000 reveals a relative stability in para-scientific beliefs.62 Another study conducted in 1994 yielded the following result: 71% of French persons believe in telepathic transmission of thoughts, 60% in astrological signs, 46% in spells or sorcery and in fortune tellers’ predictions, 39% in extraterrestrial beings, and 31% in turning tables (akin to contemporary Ouija boards). Surprisingly, this kind of belief can indeed be linked with other kinds of belief (faith in the existence of God, for example). This phenomenon remains paradoxical in a secular society impregnated by a powerful Cartesian tradition and with one-third of persons “without religion.” It seems that neither Catholicism as a religious system nor rationality have managed to make such phenomena disappear.63 THE RELIGIOUS CONTEXT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM Why have we chosen the United Kingdom as a country representative of the European Protestant context? Everything seems to contradict such representation: (1) Theologically, the Anglican Church is situated between Catholicism and Protestantism and cannot simply be integrated into continental Protestant Churches. (2) The United Kingdom is not a uniformly Protestant religious context. It is split into four political entities and other supplementary and distinct regional and religious cultures. Despite its intermediary position, we include Anglicanism in the Protestant movement because it is a church resulting from the Reformation and because its theology has been more influenced by Protestantism. The existence of several Protestant Churches gives the United Kingdom a particularly rich and varied religious context. This relatively longstanding pluralism within British Protestantism stands in opposition to the monolithic image of European countries dominated by the tradition of Roman Catholicism. Our choice is based on these two reasons. Our analysis of the British case largely follows the classic work of Grace Davie.64 Contemporary Religious History since 1945 Davie distinguishes four periods since 1945:

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 58

25-09-2021 09:26:08

The Current “Religious” Context

59

(1) The first period includes the years 1945–1960 dominated by the country’s reconstruction following the preceding tragic events. The material reconstruction of churches was followed by a veritable rehabilitation of the Anglican Church. This church enjoyed great popularity; it was in phase with the rest of society. This rather favorable attitude toward the church did not constrain the church to reform itself; it was simply possible to pick up the old institutions and continue working as before the war. But from the end of the 1950s onward, sociological studies demonstrated that industrialized regions of the country fell increasingly out of church influence. This was notably the case for the worker population. (2) With the coming of the following generation, the church’s role was profoundly shaken. This second period covering the 1960s saw fundamental changes unfolding within society. Traditional values came into question (the family, the role of women, sexual morality) and the bearer of these values, the church, along with them. This latter was convinced of the need for radical institutional reform after some time. It had to do away with its outmoded image and adapt as quickly as possible to the new elements of society. The message of the churches had to become modern and relevant; barriers between “sacred” and “profane” had to be removed. The churches set out on innovative paths, notably in the social domain. They sought collective political action surpassing local initiatives to better put a check on social injustice. All these initiatives aimed to renew contact with a part of society which had become indifferent to religious matters. This simultaneously meant that the churches looked to society to discern which paths to take. Often without realizing it, they committed to reforms which were certainly necessary, but only partially thought out. They were on a dangerous path, as the weakening of the “sacred,” the very heart of each religion, had sparked their own secularization. (3) The reemergence of the sacred characterized the third period, from 1970– 1990. The enthusiasms of the previous decade were halted by the economic and political crisis of the seventies. The church’s reform projects took a heavy blow under the realization that modernity, too, did not keep all its promises. The return to the “sacred” domain was conceivable once more—but not in the sense of a restoration, since other religious phenomena had come to light. New and very diversified religious movements were born during this period. Their adherents sought new responses, but outside of “Christian” paths. These persons were distinguished by opposition to traditional models of Christianity. A similar trend developed within churches, for example, in the growth of the Evangelical wing of Protestantism and the emergence of “house churches.” Moreover, immigrant communities within the British Isles came out of obscurity, affirming their religious particularities. Davie notes two contradictory currents

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 59

25-09-2021 09:26:08

60

Chapter 2

in the seventies. On the one hand, the religious characteristics of the sixties continued to inform society: indifference toward “religion” remained the norm, though few persons really broke solidarity with Christianity. On the other hand, Christian and non-Christian minority religious movements developed, emphasizing free adhesion to a religion of one’s choice. These two currents also increasingly affected the established churches. Concerning the eighties (the “decade” of Margaret Thatcher), Davie observes an anomaly: churches and political parties inverted their roles. The radical political reforms undertaken by the Thatcher government had harmful consequences among society’s most disadvantaged. Churches took up the role generally played by parties, transforming themselves into the spokespeople of the national community in favor of the poor. (4) The reemergence of the preceding generation’s “sacred” was established during the 1990s, but as a “reformulated” sacred, according to Davie. The notion of religion as a consumer good appears at this point. This ambivalent notion might signify either an individualist constitution of one’s own belief through a consumer attitude, or going beyond this fashion toward a spiritual path which surpasses precisely this notion of religion as a consumer good—a “better” way compared to the first “materialist” option. Ambient individualism permitted the search for an alternative lifestyle. Davie lays out two examples: the success of alternative medicine, and the concern for ecology. In opposition to the sixties, the profane world now used the thematic of the “sacred,” banalizing it in daily life. The frontier between the “sacred” and the “profane” had never been so blurry. Davie observes a second phenomenon in addition to “religions as a consumer good”: the “New Age,” with an immense variety and richness of practices which would exert increasing influence on UK citizens. This blend of philosophies and practices deriving from Eastern and Western inspirations is very difficult to define and grasp due to the multitude of its expressions. But it constitutes sufficient proof that the “sacred” remains in modern British society. Davie concludes her survey with three important observations: (1) The restoration of churches after the Second World War gave way to the radicalism of the sixties, sparking a new resurgence of the “sacred” in the seventies and nineties. The role of churches and society was inverted. The “profane” world henceforth borrows from the “sacred” domain. (2) Religious institutions lost regular contact with the majority of the UK population over the last fifty years. But irregular contact is still widespread.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 60

25-09-2021 09:26:08

The Current “Religious” Context

61

(3) We can observe a fall in religious practice in the second half of the twentieth century. But a form of religiosity persists. A growing gap between “practice” and “belief” is visible from one generation to another.65 The end of Margaret Thatcher’s tenure as prime minister in 1990 marks a caesura in the political landscape. The two successive heads of government still claim Christianity as inspiration for their politics. The Archbishop of Canterbury maintains his role as one of the country’s moral leaders despite the marginalization of the Anglican institution, which serves as an index of this typically British religious ambiguity. The question of the UK’s place among the nations was posed anew with the start of the war in Iraq: does she rely more on North American connections or on her relations with the European continent? The religious dimension of the political discussion concerning support or opposition to this war played a significant role.66 Religions The United Kingdom is a nation composed of four countries. Each of these countries maintains a different relation with churches: The Church of England is a state church with a “limited monopoly.” This church is essentially English, but other (“dissident”) Protestant Churches exist which do not share the same privileged status. Most Scots adhere to Presbyterian Churches (in a Calvinist lineage); the most important of these is the Church of Scotland,67 at once “established and free,” which concretely means that it is not a state church (thus “free”), but has a certain state-recognized historical legitimacy (thus “established”). Wales has a strong culture of “dissident” Protestantisms; each of these churches is relatively small when taken separately, but they form a relatively strong ensemble. These churches are “free” in relation to the state, but they constitute an important characteristic of Welsh culture. Finally, many Roman Catholics and Protestants of various confessions without particular ties to the state live in Northern Ireland. The degree of religious practice brings this province closer to the Republic of Ireland than to Great Britain. We now turn from the countries to the various religious groups which make up the United Kingdom. (1) The Anglicans of England (Church of England) constitute roughly 80% of the members of this church in Great Britain. The other 20% are scattered among the other churches of the three remaining countries (Church in Wales, Episcopal Church of Scotland, Church of Ireland). The interpretation of statistical data is moving in the sense of this church’s general decline. Membership figures, participation in the Lord’s Supper, baptism rates, marriages, confirmations, and even the number of persons who

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 61

25-09-2021 09:26:08

62

Chapter 2

commit to becoming clergy are all in decline (of course, allowing for possible variations by period and region). If there were 672 baptisms per 1,000 births in 1950, this number dropped to 275 in 1990. The number of confirmations fell by more than 50% between 1960 and 1982, an evolution which also applies to ordinations. Of the twenty-six theology faculties operating in 1961, only fifteen educational institutions remained in 1977. Davie takes up Hastings’ observation according to which the life forces of the Church of England were reduced by half between 1960 and 1985. Nevertheless, it seems that this situation stabilized toward the end of the 1990s. Of course, the statistics hide the extreme variety of situations which are the fruit not only of societal influence, but also of church politics. For example, this diversity is visible regarding infant baptism. It happens that one local community might encourage initiating children into the Christian faith from the youngest age, but the neighboring church might discourage them because it only accepts children from committed and practicing parents. An even more robust pluralism and fragmentation can be observed on the level of worship practices. Certain parishes experience strong attendance at their worship services. This is true primarily of “eclectic” churches in the suburbs. Religious practice is more important in the countryside than in the urban context, but multiple parishes are often grouped together and served by one pastor. These examples concerning religious practice in the Church of England are the exception which confirm the rule of a general drop in church attendance despite regional variations. The notable decline in members of this church to 1.8 million persons in 1992 brings this community’s institutional ties to the state into question. It raises the question of the legitimacy of this relation since the Anglican Church has itself become a minority in UK society. According to Davie, a second level of observations intervenes at this point. Despite the loss of interest, a large part of the (principally English) population maintains distant relations to this church which it is not ready to abandon. The state church has retained a large number of such “latent” adherents, estimated at 25.5 million persons in 1990. In this light, pleas in favor of maintaining the state church status are reassured. “Nominal” Anglicanism is thus currently the most widespread religious form in England since Anglican forms and official functions still play an important role in society.68 (2) For the last several decades, Roman Catholics have surpassed the number of Anglicans in the United Kingdom—a surprising fact in a country whose history is particularly marked by Anglicanism. Active members numbered somewhere around 2 million persons in 1992. The dominical practice of Roman Catholics reached its zenith in the 1960s, with roughly half of the faithful attending mass at this time. The 1980s were marked

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 62

25-09-2021 09:26:09

The Current “Religious” Context

63

by a decline of roughly 30% in this practice. Before this date, English Catholicism as a culture was rather distinct from British society. This well-forged identity was upset by geographic and social mobility in the postwar period. Catholics were no longer assimilated to the image of a Northern-Irish laborer, but they nevertheless retained the characteristics of an immigrant group—as visible, for example, in higher rates of religious practice than other groups of the population. But the principal element remains: observers today highlight the growing heterogeneity of Catholicism (primarily in England and Wales), to the detriment of characteristics of a common identity. Two factors allowed for this change: on the one hand, the contact of Roman Catholics with a secularized society undergoing fundamental mutations; on the other hand, British Catholicism’s commitment to resolutely apply the decisions of the Vatican II council in favor of an active implication in ecumenical processes.69 (3) The Orthodox community encompassed 275,000 members in 1992, primarily in England. The majority of its members originate from Cyprus. The numbers of this Christian Church are growing. ( 4) The free Churches70 constitute part of British Protestantism, composing an important group of Christian denominations. Their adherents are more numerous than Roman Catholics or Anglicans if we include the Presbyterian Churches. In 1992, this Protestant grouping approached a total number of 2.6 million persons. These various “dissident” churches each represent a distinct field of research. This diversity implies quite different evolutions, which is indeed the case. Some of these churches are fighting to survive; others are experiencing strong growth. The oldest Baptist, Presbyterian, and Methodist churches saw their growth peak before the beginning of the First World War. Decline among non-conformist churches has set in and accelerated since 1945. Baptist churches have been able to stem their loss of members since the 1980s; their numbers are currently stable. Presbyterians and Methodists have not managed to turn this evolution around. But important regional differences must be pointed out. Presbyterians maintain some influence in Scotland, which is also true of Methodists in certain regions of England and Wales. The Pentecostal church has been growing for the last several decades, with a constant annual growth rate of roughly 5%. The independent churches have grown most rapidly, moving from 250,000 to 350,000 members between the beginning and end of the 1980s. This growth is explained in large part by the phenomenon of house churches, which constitute the strongest movement among independent churches. These churches make up a very flexible movement which does not seek to create a new denomination, but to restore a New Testament Church model. This ideal translates into a minimally institutionalized religious expression, using

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 63

25-09-2021 09:26:09

64

Chapter 2

individuals’ private space for meetings. Churches deriving from the black community represent the second phenomenon of strong growth. The majority are born out of rejection by traditional Churches. They have often replaced the free churches losing speed in certain big city neighborhoods. ( 5) Other religions are non-Christian religious groups. The Muslim community numbers around 1.1 million persons in Great Britain (1990), landing it first place in this category. The vast majority of these Muslims originate from the Indian sub-continent. A distinct portion of this immigrant population has successfully integrated, but a sizable fringe suffers from multiple social handicaps (notably a higher unemployment rate, which places them among British society’s most disadvantaged). Jews constitute a rather aging religious population, having seen a reduction in numbers after 1950. Other religious minorities are constituted by the 400,000 Hindus and 600,000 Sikhs. Taken together, all these minorities are unequally distributed in the United Kingdom, resulting in phenomena of concentration. The most militant factions among them pose the question of their place within a largely secularized society. The New Religious Movements elude the traditional classification of religions because they encompass very heterogenous groups with extremely heterogeneous structures, ideologies, and modes of functioning. Their definitions and limits are difficult to establish. It is estimated that several hundred thousand persons have participated in such movements at some point in their life.71 According to census data from April 29, 2001, UK citizens adhere to the following religions: 71.8% Christians (41 million); 2.8% Muslims (1.6 million); 1% Hindus (560,000); 0.6% Sikhs (340,000); 0.5% Jews (270,000); 0.3% Buddhists (149,000); 0.3% other religions (160,000). Those “without religions” constitute 15.1% of the entire population. Muslims make up the second largest religious group after Christians. 7.8% of UK citizens chose not to associate themselves in relation to any religion. The rate of Christians here appears greater than in other surveys. This “optimist” figure might be explained by a survey method.72 Since 2001, roughly a million Poles (of whom the vast majority are Roman Catholics) have immigrated to the United Kingdom.73 The second great change concerns Muslims. Since 1990, there are between 300,000 and 500,000 additional persons who adhere to this religion according to different surveys. It is not this growth which raises questions, but rather the way Muslims react to a secularized Western culture which separates the subject from the object and public space from private space. These values of secularization confront a Muslim culture foreign to such court empowerment and which questions such juridical developments.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 64

25-09-2021 09:26:09

The Current “Religious” Context

65

This tension concerns not only the British context, but also other European countries with a Muslim presence. Beliefs Adherence or non-adherence to a Christian “religion” is easily verifiable through surveys. But since religious practice today no longer corresponds to definitions of the religious fact according to the criteria established by the sociology of religions, we must turn to the more diffuse field of religious beliefs. The observation made in the previous section that UK citizens tend less and less to practice a religion should not hide the fact that a large majority believe in God (around 70% between 1981 and 1991). No longer attending a church does not necessarily signify no longer believing in God. This gap between religious practice and beliefs stimulates the reflection of sociologists of religions and raises many new questions. We continue to follow Davie’s analysis of belief in British society. (1) The individual dimension of beliefs is circumscribed by notions such as “privatized religion,” “traditional religion,” or “common religion.” Davie favors the latter. This form of religiosity has prevailed in Europe since the second half of the twentieth century. It expresses the fact that “religion” has become an affair of private choice. This religiosity is increasingly diversifying in innumerable expressions within the uncertain limits of individualism. The character of these beliefs is very heterodox, straying ever further from religious orthodoxy. But a complex relation persists between the two forms of the religious. In the United Kingdom—which was a religious culture largely (but not exclusively) informed by Christianity—Davie highlights that a residual Protestantism remains present among most UK citizens. This phenomenon of British “common religion” possesses a specifically Christian character analogous to “nominal Christianity.” Davie insists on this point based on numerous surveys, seeing this latter element as much more important than secularism.74 (2) The public dimension of beliefs can be grasped through the “Durkheimian” functionalist approach: what function does religion have in a given society? The accent is displaced from the essence of the religious toward its function. If a religion loses its important social role, what comes to replace the void which it leaves? Western society’s trend of increasingly confining the religious to the private sphere has not been carried to its logical conclusion; religion retains some of its influence on the public domain. This public space partially liberated by the “privatization” of the religious is occupied by what we call civil religion. Christianity is not the same thing as civil religion, but this latter maintains ambivalent

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 65

25-09-2021 09:26:09

66

Chapter 2

relations with Christian orthodoxy. Despite its inherent evolution toward emancipation, civil religion derives its legitimacy from Christianity. For the United Kingdom, this primarily concerns Anglicanism. Davie cites the royal British family as an example of this complex relation. The king or queen primarily represent the nation and maintain British identity. But he or she is secondarily the leader of the Anglican Church. On the occasion of coronation ceremonies or other rituals implicating the royal family, the specifically British civil religion fully flourishes since the monarchy is not uniquely experienced as a symbol of the nation, but also partially as a religious phenomenon. The two aspects of the civil religion, the civic and religious side, only form a unity in the eyes of participants at such manifestations. The civic religion provides references for current public morality, but also for the challenges of common life and very specialized questions of future ethics. The traditional religious foundation for decision-making has eroded; it is no longer accepted by most UK citizens, but a new foundation has yet to be constructed. For the moment, the British version of civil religion (or the ensemble of extant civil religions in the country) still maintains an (Anglican) Christian character, but Davie wonders about its durability.75 Believing without Belonging Davie developed her famous thesis “believing without belonging” based on a synthesis of observations concerning religious groups in the UK and British beliefs (summarized in the two preceding sections). She constructed a pragmatic and ideal-typical typology which makes a useful tool for analyzing the contemporary religious situation. The formula incisively expresses a general analysis of the evolution of the religious in this nation: there is a growing gap between belonging to a religion and personal belief. But the decline of religious practice does not imply the complete disappearance of “faith,” since the “sacred” persists in society. Davie applies her theoretical framework to the geographic and socioeconomic dimensions of the United Kingdom. The limits of her model quickly appear when faced with the multitude of regional religious contexts within each British country. The ledger of variations is vast: for example, between a Northern Ireland whose religious practice is exceptionally strong, and an England whose Anglican state church has very few true adherents but many who maintain their affinity for this church. A quick glance at Wales and Scotland reveals that the first possesses a large population of “non-conformist” Christians, while the second still finds its national identity in the “established” Presbyterian church. Davie notes that religious belonging is stronger in Scotland than in Wales. England comes perhaps the closest to Davie’s ideal-type model when considering the “religious”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 66

25-09-2021 09:26:09

67

The Current “Religious” Context

behavior of its inhabitants in a purely theoretical “average.” These general remarks should not hide the notable differences which co-inhabit a given country. Davie explains these regional differences separately for each country. For example, the regions of Cornwall and Devon clearly demonstrate that religious “frontiers” and regional borders are not identical. Devon appears more “religious” than the “English average,” while the habits of Cornwall residents are close to this average. In contrast with Cornwall, where “nonconformist” churches (notably Methodism) are more robustly present, the Anglican Church maintains deep roots in Devon. These geographical observations ought to be enriched with socioeconomic data, which again modifies the “religious landscape” since these factors also determine belief and religious belonging among UK citizens. We have reproduced Davie’s “believing without belonging” typology below (see figure 2.1):  Davie is well aware that each affirmation of this typology hardly exists in a pure state, but that it can function as a characteristic of a kind of belief. Davie summarizes the British situation in the following manner: The general profile of religious life is changing. Indeed, it seems that a growing number of UK citizens choose to believe but at the same time refuse to practice. In other words, certain aspects of religious behavior among the working class . . . are becoming characteristics of society as a whole.76

Davie’s approach has been criticized, but it retains its pertinence regarding sociological observation of the religious fact. Since its 1994 publication, the country’s “religious” situation has changed. This change has led Davie to develop two other notions: “vicarious religion” and religion of consumption. The first stipulates that a majority of non-practicing persons approve of the active religious minority of a society. The minority thus replaces the majority, substitutes itself in its place.77 The second notion describes the definitive Disadvantaged Neighborhoods: Middle-class suburbs: City centers: Countrysides:

underground belief well-articulated belief civic belief inherited belief

Roman Catholic Church: Black (Afro-West Indian) Churches:

expressed belief

Religious education: Religious programs:

community belief injected or rejected belief believing-withoutbelonging par excellence

Figure 2.1   Typology of “Believing without Belonging” According to Grace Davie.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 67

25-09-2021 09:26:11

68

Chapter 2

abandon of obligatory adhesion to a “religion” in favor of pluralism, relativism, and a religion of “choice.” Free adhesion becomes the de facto rule, even in the context of a state church like the Anglican Church. This choice is increasingly motivated by the search for an experience (whether aesthetic or otherwise).78 THE RELIGIOUS CONTEXT OF ROMANIA Having presented a country molded by Catholicism and a country with a Protestant history, we now turn toward a nation from the Orthodox sphere, Romania. We have chosen Romania for its triple representative capacity: situated at the east of the continent, it belongs to the European Union, proof of its attachment to European identity; it has been decisively influenced by the Orthodox Church, an influence continuing today; and it is a country of the East (among others) which underwent dramatic political change following the fall of the communist regime in 1989. Studies concerning the evolution of the religious fact since the people’s revolt now allow for the analysis of this new phase in Romanian history. Our analysis largely follows a recent thesis by Laurentiu D. Tanase.79 Contemporary Religious History, 1918–1945 Romania’s religious history is intrinsically tied to major developments in its political history. We discern three moments. Formerly, Romania was situated at the edge of the Ottoman, Russian, and Hapsburg empires, and remained subject to them until the 1918 constitution of the modern state at the end of the First World War. Its national legitimacy was the result of a long revolt against the domination of these enemy empires. The Romanians’ political emancipation notably began in the nineteenth century after Greek independence in 1829, though the populations of the three historical provinces (Moldova, Wallachia, and for some time Transylvania) had formerly experienced a strong rapprochement, as they spoke a common language, practiced the same religion, and shared the same national sentiments. The first national union was ratified between the first two provinces in 1859 following the intervention of Napoleon III. This first state, officially recognized as independent in 1878, received its territorial unity in complement to its preexisting factors of identity. The union of the two provinces into one state was followed by the union of the two respective Orthodox churches. The Orthodox patriarchate in Constantinople decided to grant autocephalic recognition to the Romanian Church in 1885 following various political and ecclesial requests. It thus became a distinct entity with rights equal to those

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 68

25-09-2021 09:26:12

The Current “Religious” Context

69

held by the other national Orthodox churches. The Allies’ victory at the end of the First World War allowed Romania to consider itself among the victors. On this occasion, it managed to considerably expand its national territory thanks to the integration of Transylvania (formerly the third historical province), Banat, Bukovina, and Bessarabia into the historical core of Moldova and Wallachia. The role of the Orthodox Church, its centuries-old direct links with the history, language, culture, and different political forms of Romanian national unity, have caused historians to speak of a “Romanian soul.” This privileged relation was of capital importance for the young state-in-formation since the Orthodox Church provided it with foundations of theological legitimacy. The foundation of the “Great Union” of Romania on December 1, 1918 fundamentally changed its ethnic and religious characteristics. Amidst trying postwar difficulties, the country had to expend considerable effort to reconstruct and unify the nation. Its surface area and population had more than doubled. Before the First World War, around 92% of the population in Romania were Romanian and considered themselves Orthodox Christians. The 1930 census described a completely different population and religious belonging: the Orthodox Christian population corresponded almost directly with the Romanian ethnic element in the society at around 72%, while the percentage of religious minorities had grown to roughly 28%. This third of the population was roughly equal to the entire population of the Romanian nation at the end of the nineteenth century. This significant group of religious minorities was composed of Greek Catholics, Catholics, Jews, Reformed Christians, Lutherans, Muslims, and other religions. These demographic changes can be explained by the integration of the new provinces with their considerable contribution of ethnic and religious minorities, with the unique case of Transylvania as the most visible example. In 1930, this province was occupied by only 57.6% Orthodox Romanians. “At the beginning of the twentieth century, Romania went from a monoconfessional and mono-ethnic state to a majority Orthodox, but multiethnic and multi-confessional state.”80 It must be noted that citizens’ religious belonging directedly corresponded to the country’s ethnic composition. On the national level, the new situation required drafting a constitution which also needed to better handle the new element of a first major religious diversification. The old Romanian kingdom had no particular laws pertaining to non-Orthodox religions, and the new provinces bequeathed a heteroclite juridical corpus on the subject to the new unified state. These laws were handed down from the various regimes which had formerly occupied the new provinces. The Romanian Constitution of 1923 promulgated equality of Romanians before the law and freedom of conscience and association (article 5). It

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 69

25-09-2021 09:26:12

70

Chapter 2

recognized the majority status of the Orthodox Church by designating it as “dominant,” and designated the Greek Catholic church as having “priority” in relation to other forms of worship. The privileged status of the Orthodox Church was thus lightly upset for the first time, though it still maintained significant privileges compared with other religions in Romania. Its political dimension remained almost totally intact. The Orthodox Church’s importance was even reinforced by the elevation of the archbishop’s seat in Bucharest to the level of patriarch in 1925. The constitution of the Romanian state further stipulated other elements concerning religious life. But these were not entirely satisfactory for religious minorities. Indeed, certain forms of worship had already been present for centuries (Judaism, Islam, Lutheran and Calvinist churches); others, such as Baptist churches, Adventist churches, and Jehovah’s witnesses were implanted during the second half of the nineteenth century. These latter religious groups were classified as “sects” beginning in 1920. This term clearly defined them as exogenous to Romania since they represented non-Romanian ethnicities. For the Orthodox hierarchy, this was reason to affirm a separation between the traditional Romanian Orthodox society and the worship of “foreigners.” These latter fought to obtain the status of “recognized worship” already enjoyed by the Lutheran and Calvinist churches. The governments made several decisions in this regard—some favorable, others less so. These various negotiations finally culminated in a 1928 law concerning the general regulation of worship, clearly defining the legal religious organizations in Romania. Figuring alongside the Orthodox Church and the Greek Catholic Church were Roman Catholic worship (with its three different churches), Reformed worship, Lutheran worship, Unitarian worship, Gregorian Armenian worship, Judaism, and Islam. Baptist and Adventist churches were later added to this apparatus, and even later the Christians according to the Gospel.81 There were still other religious movements in Romania which this law did not mention. Two trends derived according to the (Orthodox) theologians of the era: on the one hand, “neo-protestant” groups coming mostly from the West, which were implanted via Transylvania; on the other hand, “mystical” groups coming from Moldova, spreading in the Eastern part of the country. In 1931, these two groups—together with the Baptists and Adventists—numbered around 60,000 members, corresponding to 0.3% of the overall population. To conclude this first interwar period, we note important changes affecting all levels of Romanian society. Religious diversification was a predictable consequence of ethnic plurality. This pluralization would engender conflicts with the structures of this traditional society, which saw a threat to the privileged relations between the Orthodox Church and the state. This pair was considered the foundation of the nation; the Orthodox Church saw itself as

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 70

25-09-2021 09:26:12

The Current “Religious” Context

71

the protector of this Romanian identity. Its privileged position as a popular church (in the true sense of the term—“of the people”) allowed only for tense and defensive relations with the new religious movements. This period represents a first (and certainly a very limited, but nonetheless decisive for what would come after) phase of religious pluralization.82 Contemporary Religious History, 1945–1989 The new communist regime set up in Romania at the end of the Second World War (with the support of several divisions of Soviet tanks) did everything it could to fight religious expression, whether openly or covertly. The new power broke all resistance among elites by uniting the disadvantaged segments of Romanian society. The first twenty years of the communist regime were dominated by the wing of the communist Party which was faithful to Moscow. Only in 1965 was a native finally promoted to chief of state. The election of Nicolae Ceausescu sparked a glimmer of hope, an aspiration toward democratic openness, but he very quickly imposed a personal dictatorship. The forty-five years of the communist regime were characterized by total indoctrination of the general population and instrumentalization and purge of the clergy (primarily Orthodox and Greek Catholic), employing the most barbaric methods of humiliation (including brainwashing, among others). Clergy members and laypersons of opposing parties were kept under surveillance, persecuted, and imprisoned. 13,000 villages were wiped off the map by state authorities. Peasants were stuffed into poorly heated city buildings with no running water and with electricity only for several hours per day. The state abandoned the elderly, leaving them to their own resources. The population had no time for anything other than providing for their daily survival in an ambience of terror. Sociologist of religions Laurentiu Tanase distinguishes two periods in the relation between churches and the communist regime. During the first period, the churches exerted some resistance, which resulted in repressions (and notably, massive arrests) from the regime; during the second period, they adapted to a form of collaboration with the state out of necessity. The Romanian state drafted a new Constitution in 1948 guaranteeing freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom to associate. These rights were only theoretically applied, since every new religious association owed its legal existence to the preliminary authorization from the related state office. No approval was accorded for the duration of the communist regime. This was enough not only to stifle any new attempts at religious expression, but also served to repress existing religious services. It forced the Greek Catholic Churches to integrate with the Orthodox Church, with the latter receiving the confiscated goods of the former. The Roman Catholic Church

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 71

25-09-2021 09:26:13

72

Chapter 2

lost its legally recognized status through the annulation of the Concordat between the Romanian state and the Vatican. A decree was published in 1948 which transferred the ability to grant official recognition to religious groups to the Presidium of the Grand National Assembly. Each group qualifying for religious association status had to present itself before this Presidium. The law recorded fourteen “legally recognized” religions, a number which remained unchanged despite numerous religious confessions’ desire to obtain this status. Certain religious “sects” (dubbed thus by the regime) were forced to content themselves with an illegal existence, a status suffered by some and sought by others. Above all, this law allowed the regime to totally submit religious groups to political power. Certain “neo-Protestant” and “mystical” communities were forced to unite into larger groups in the years following the 1948 law. The position of the Orthodox Church was delicate; it had to choose between loyalty and illegality before an atheist state. It ultimately chose the intermediary solution of submission.83 This was the only option for an institution which felt responsible for the survival of the Romanian culture. Other institutions were suppressed by the communist regime. For its part, the totalitarian regime could not ignore the credibility and influence of the Orthodox Church in the eyes of the people. It could not abolish it and thus had to select more subtle methods of subjection. The regime wagered on the effects of communist propaganda which should have put an end to the ancestral influence of the Orthodox Church. The desired effects were obtained. The state thus became more directly involved in directing the church—limiting the age of prelates’ practice, pressuring for nomination of bishops favorable to the regime, suppressing dioceses, and finally launching a wave of persecution. In the period from 1956–1972 alone, 2,500 priests, clergy, and laypersons were arrested, and half of the monasteries closed their doors. Four “neo-Protestant” churches continued to hold worship: the Baptist church, the Pentecostal church, the Adventist church, and the Christians according to the Gospel. But like the other “religions,” they were under constant surveillance, infiltrated by informers, intimidated and threatened with imprisonment. The state gave fewer and fewer authorizations for the construction of religious edifices, although Evangelical churches experienced significant growth according to the archives of the Securitate. The number of practicing adults grew from around 160,000 to 270,000 between 1968–1988. These figures demonstrate that these four unions of churches were perceived by some Romanians as a means of resistance toward the atheist regime. The period of the communist regime finished with the popular revolt of 1989. The imposition of a completely secular culture was the result of fortyfour years of atheist propaganda. Religious holidays had been replaced by secular holidays. The religious field had barely evolved in comparison with

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 72

25-09-2021 09:26:13

The Current “Religious” Context

73

the pre-Second World War era. The state had a monopoly on regulation of worship. “Recognized religions” could only exist within strict limits. The state closely surveilled all religious manifestations and planned each development, as it did in other domains. This “planned economy” cut off all possible religious influence at its roots. According to Tanase, despite its inevitable compromises, the Orthodox Church had become the only major institution protecting the Romanian cultural memory. This church offered a final space of freedom and opposition because of its social importance.84 Contemporary Religious History, 1989–2005 The revolt of the Romanian people during the final days of December 1989 constitutes the most violent uprising among former communist bloc states of the era. The active participation of religious representatives in these dramatic events—along with the actual freedom suddenly offered by a democratic political space—unleashed a new religious dynamic which profoundly remodeled the religious landscape of Romania. Political management of the “religious” went from strict state regulation to a deregulation of the “religious market,” as freedom of choice in religious matters was assured by the new democratic framework. This freedom allowed for the appearance of new religious movements which had not seen the light of day during the communist era due to a quasi-total lockdown on possible new “religious” emergences. Tanase lists several factors which explain the dynamic of these new movements. He cites three endogenous causes: (1) The religious factor played an important role during the revolutionary upheavals. It played a direct and determining role during the upheavals in Timisoara, and an indirect role through moral support given to actors in the capital of Bucharest. Tanase’s detailed analysis describes 1989 as an “explosion of religiosity.” God was constantly invoked by religious dignitaries, by the crowd chanting “God is with us!” but also by political opponents. (2) Most representatives of the Orthodox Church adopted a favorable attitude toward the December 1989 revolution. They finally saw an end to their struggles and the possibility of carrying on their worship unconstrained. Active participation in the revolutionary events guaranteed them an important position in the new state. This favorable position opened up the possibility of effacing the negative effects of their history, marred as it was by collaboration with the communist regime. Very quickly—on the third and fourth day of January—the Holy Synod addressed a declaration of repentance to believers. It sent a proposal of themes for discussion to the National Salvation Front Council in which

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 73

25-09-2021 09:26:14

74

Chapter 2

we can clearly discern the Orthodox Church’s desire to maintain and expand its religious monopoly. This church positioned itself as the state’s privileged partner. (3) In the post-revolutionary years, the relation between the new state and “recognized religions” was strengthened thanks to the state’s weak grip on society, the reputation of non-collaboration with the old regime enjoyed by these religions, the absence of religious legislation, and conflicts internal to these religions. The fourteen “recognized” religious groups of the communist era had certainly experienced considerable restrictions in their religious activities, but at the same time they were financially supported by the old regime. They did not want to lose these prerogatives, and the new political class absolutely needed to be seen as legitimate by them (primarily by the Orthodox Church). Throughout these post-communist years the parliament prepared a new constitution, which was brought to light in 2003. The religious domain was founded on the principle of separation of religion and politics, all while maintaining cooperation between religions and the state. One law regulated “a general regime of religious groups,” but resistance to existing projects from religious groups sabotaged parliament’s intentions. The 1948 law remained in effect, though with four new religions added. Other groups could organize as associations and foundations but did not enjoy the privileges of the “recognized religions.” The two juridical forms of religious organization—“recognized religion” and “association and foundation”—are not different in terms of authority, but due to a difference in the social impact of a belief and in the Government’s prioritized support of religions whose precepts are shared by a great number of citizens and whose prolonged historical existence in the territory has made a significant contribution to Romanian cultural and spiritual development.85

This relation allowed for some complicity between partners, an advantage over other emergent movements. We can briefly enumerate the exogenous causes discussed by Tanase: (1) The effects of globalization, and primarily North American influence, favored the implantation of new “beliefs” in Romania. (2) Humanitarian aid combined with missionary strategy—notably by Evangelical organizations—attracted new adherents to these groups. (3) Foreign missionaries—mostly Christians, but also Muslims and Baha’i, were sent into Romanian territory to promote their “religion.” We nevertheless observe that the number of missionaries has declined since 2003. The success of these “missions” and “missionaries” was rather limited.86

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 74

25-09-2021 09:26:14

The Current “Religious” Context

75

Religions We will now present the religious field of Romania in 2003, still using data provided by Tanase. After this historical survey, there are three obvious poles which structure the religious field. First, the Orthodox Church, whose size and clearly dominant influence distinguish it from the other two poles, which are the religions recognized by the state and new religious movements. We will briefly describe each pole. (1) Freed from all dictatorial constraints, the Orthodox church underwent a complete restructuring and renaissance after 1990. New dioceses, new parishes, and new monasteries were created by the church hierarchy. In 2004, places of worship numbered around 14,000, and monastic institutions had almost tripled in thirteen years, populated by 7,600 monks and nuns. The number of clergy members and lay employees grew significantly (12,300 priests and deacons, 5,300 cantors); roughly 1,500 church buildings were built in thirteen years; and in the same period, theological institutes went from eight (two university institutes and six seminaries) to fifty-three faculties. The Orthodox population rose to 18.8 million people in 2002; it had dropped by roughly 1 million people since 1992. The Orthodox Church invested in important sectors of public life through chaplaincies and social work, enjoying high levels of trust among the population. In survey results, it had more favorable ratings than the Romanian army and parliament.87 (2) The second pole of the religious field is composed “recognized religions” acknowledged by the Romanian state. The eighteen religions or Christian confessions comprising this field benefit from state financial aid. Most of these groups were already recognized before the communist period. Tanase classifies nine in the “ethnic religion” category. These are the Christian churches, Judaism, and Islam. Their adherents are often connected to a particular ethnicity speaking German, Hungarian, Russian, or Turkish. Historically, their implantations predate the second group, the “neo-Protestants.” The Hungarian and German ethnic Protestant Churches of the first group are primarily implanted in Transylvania, while Muslims form a majority in a Southeastern province. Members of the Romanian Catholic Church represent 4.7% of the population, amounting to roughly 1 million people. The new government allowed the reconstitution of the Greek Catholic church after the fall of communism. But this church has never managed to reach the membership which it had before the communist era. It represented barely 1% (191,556 adherents) of the population in 2002.88 Two ethnic Protestant Churches also experienced a notable drop in adherents (the Lutheran church of the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 75

25-09-2021 09:26:14

76

Chapter 2

Augsburg Confession and the Presbyterian polity Lutheran church). The two churches combined amount to barely more than 35,000 members. The Calvinist Reformed church which played a determining role in the great 1989 upheaval in Timisoara comes in third in terms of membership numbers. 3.2% of the population belonged to this church in 2002. Jews form a small minority in Romania, while the Muslim population has grown (67,000 people in 2002) since the opening of the economy after the fall of communism. Religions in the second group—essentially composed of Evangelical churches and Jehovah’s Witnesses—have seen the strongest development. Evangelicals had already grown by roughly 100,000 members under the communist regime. This growth would continue to amplify thanks to the new democratic context. Between 1992 and 2002, Baptist churches saw a 15.7% increase in membership, while membership in Pentecostal churches rose by 46.9%. The reasons for this growth can be found in their strong adaptation to the new socioeconomic situation, in missionary strategy and method, in a democratic-associative structural model, and in the simplicity of their liturgy. Roughly 450,000 Romanians declared themselves Baptist or Pentecostal in 2002. Seventhday Adventists and “brethren” churches were frequented by roughly 156,000 people. Jehovah’s witnesses were recognized as an official religion in 2003. They encompassed around 30,000 members in 2004. Unlike the first (“ethnic”) group, “Neo-Protestant” churches do not accept state financial support for their clergy.89 (3) The genesis of a third pole on the “religious” ledger—the New Religious Movements—was obviously impossible until post-1989, since the totalitarian regime offered no liberal framework for religious practice outside of state “recognized” religions. Suddenly religious sentiment could be expressed because dictatorial oppression had disappeared and because the liberation was accompanied by strong religious symbols. The general enthusiasm broke into the religious domain as well, allowing for a relative openness toward new religious actors who could henceforth propagate new religious forms, the majority of which were foreign to the religious habits of Romanians. Roughly thirty of these movements were registered as “associations” with the Secretary of state tasked with religious worship. According to Tanase, this first religious pluralization calmed down after 1995. The recognition of several religious associations as juridical persons and the existence of other groups who were not seeking this recognition sparked occasional vehement opposition from recognized religions—and notably from the Orthodox Church, who negatively viewed these new “competitors” as a potential threat to their religious quasi-monopoly in Romanian society. This polemic resounded strongly in the media, who spoke of an “invasion of sects.” This reaction

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 76

25-09-2021 09:26:14

The Current “Religious” Context

77

is understandable given a population unaccustomed to a sudden liberalization of the “religious market.” It was nevertheless grossly exaggerated since the New Religious Movements did not amount to more than 1% of Romanians in 2002. The domination of the first two religious poles should not hide the growth of this third new pole increasingly creating a new structure for the religious field through these antagonistic forces. Tanase proposes a classification with four types of movements: (a) Religious movements of Christian-Evangelical origin, who are mostly dissidents of the “Neo-Protestant” religious group, from the second religious pole, but also from newly founded Evangelical churches, some of which are experiencing impressive local success; (b) Oriental religious movements, inspired primarily by a spirituality originating in the religions of the far East (e.g., the Baha’i movement); (c) “Nebulous Mystic-Esoteric” movements calling on a multitude of beliefs, beginning with holistic and individualist concern and moving toward exploration of eastern religious sources, and in phenomena of para-religious popular religiosity; (d) Finally, a grouping of the various Orthodox dissidences born in Romania.90 A simple diversification of the religious field existed in an embryonic stage during the early twentieth century. This stage was almost completely curbed by the dictatorial regime until 1989. Ever since, a real pluralization of the “religious” has become theoretically possible, through activities of the New Religious Movements, among others. There has also been some competition, often within a given type of movement, allowing for an increasingly free circulation of “symbolic products.” But according to Tanase, inequalities in the treatment of religious movements mean that one cannot talk of a state of effective religious pluralism. Deregulation is only in early stages, and the secularization process already described concerning Western European countries is vastly different from the evolution of the religious situation in Romania. Current Trends Different recent studies for Eastern Europe in general91 and Romania in particular92 show the following trends. (1) Most of the former “Eastern bloc” countries demonstrate a renewal of religiosity among their inhabitants after the events of 1989.93 As this is a general observation to be nuanced for each country and region, it

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 77

25-09-2021 09:26:15

78

Chapter 2

certainly includes exceptions which confirm the rule. Romania is at the top of the list among Eastern countries, but also among all European nations according to the results of the European Values Survey in 1999/2000. Romania ranks second in terms of the expression of religious values of its inhabitants, just after Malta and before Poland and Ireland. It is the most religious Orthodox country and the most religious postcommunist country, ranking just ahead of Poland. Malina Voicu demonstrates that the supply-side theory94 cannot explain religious restoration in Romania. This model runs backward in the European religious context: restricted religious diversity “produces” growth of the “religious.” Romania’s strong religiosity is thus explicable by the near-monopoly of the Orthodox Church (a “poor” market of religious goods), a population with a low education level, and existential uncertainties linked to deep economic recession in the 1990s.95 “Religiosity” is a vast term which can cover extremely different realities. What does it really mean that 99.01% of Romanians declared themselves Christians according to the 2002 national census? Looking more closely, Sorin Gog detects a notable gap between the perception of religiosity among Romanians and their ideas, their practices, and their actual religious values.96 She observes significant erosion of Christian dogmas. 60.12% of Romanians believe in “heaven” and 44% define God as a “spirit” or a “life force” rather than conceiving of “a personal God” (35%). Religious practice, which marks the second domain of Gog’s survey, demonstrates that 53.10% of the population never or almost never attends church services. A growing separation between Christian ethics and moral values actually practiced is observable for the third domain. For example, 57.4% of inhabitants advocate abortion and 35% advocate euthanasia. At the end of her study, Gog extracts five types of “religious” personality: only 31% of Romanians adhere to the Christian faith through their ideas and acts, with 10% driven by a secularized mentality. The remaining 60% or so of the population is at least partly attained by the effects of secularization, whether on the “doctrinal” level (19%), the “practical” level (24%), or both (16%). (2) Voicu tries to measure the degree of secularization through a study questioning relations between religiosity and politics, work, and sex.97 As in the preceding study, she employs information from the EVS 1999/2000 data. Comparing Romania with other central and eastern European countries, Voicu affirms that Romania remains the most religious and least secularized state. But on the national level, she perceives a differentiated image. Religious ideas seem to have their greatest impact in Romanians’ private space; they continue to influence public

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 78

25-09-2021 09:26:15

The Current “Religious” Context

79

space to a lesser degree; and finally, religion informs the domain of work least of all. Iuliana Conovici supports the hypothesis of a beginning secularization in Romania with her observation of the official discourses of the Orthodox Church.98 On one side of the coin, religion’s reoccupation of public space after 1989 and the installation of an institution protecting national values represents the country’s religious restoration. But on the other side is the paradox of the Orthodox Church’s agitations: this church is progressing on the path of secularization without realizing it by abandoning the specific thematic of religion—transcendence—and through its concern for the material well-being of Romanian society. In this, Conovici relies on a thesis by Olivier Clément defining the nationalism of the Orthodox churches as the specific form of secularization in Orthodox countries.99 But he is opposed by Gillet’s opinion (cited above) which sees the byzantine church-state “symphony” as defending against the secularization process.100 In conclusion, we see that Romania is the most religious country in Eastern Europe. It put up the best resistance to the forced secularization of the communist regime. But its religious restoration ought to be treated with prudence in view of the gap between the religiosity displayed in figures and the real beliefs of Romanians. According to the authors, the presence of the Orthodox Church in public space could either slow or stimulate the secularization process in Romanian society.

THE RELIGIOUS CONTEXT OF THE NEW FEDERAL STATES IN GERMANY The fourth and final European religious context analyzed here examines a singular case which has featured significantly in recent discussion. It concerns the religious context of the Nouveaux Länder, or New federal states: that is, the former German Democratic Republic (GDR), or Eastern Germany, which after their reunification with the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) in 1989 became the New States of the new German state. Why did we choose this region for our analysis? The New States combine several religious characteristics which make them unique and particularly interesting. Geographically, they are situated in central and northern Germany, and in central Europe. They were part of the communist bloc, sharing a common postwar history with eastern European regions. As the former center of the Lutheran Reformation, these regions were long impregnated with Protestantism. Nevertheless, they are distinguished by an impressive advance in secularization, opposing

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 79

25-09-2021 09:26:16

80

Chapter 2

them to the religious situation of the Anciens Länder, or Old states. The two regions are now integrated into one country, the FRG. Contemporary Religious History, 1945–1989 Conquered Germany was divided into four zones governed by the four victorious nations, while the churches could maintain the pre-war territorial frontiers which predated the foundation of two distinct states. In 1949, the constitution of the young GDR barely touched the churches’ autonomy, organization, and internal law. The founders took the old dispositions of the Weimar republic constitution, integrating them into its fundamental law; a similar solution regarding church-state relations was chosen for the FRG. The GDR was composed of a majority Protestant population: survey results indicated 14.8 million Protestant respondents out of an overall population of 18.4 million in 1950. Roman Catholics numbered only 2.7 million adherents at this time. Fifty percent of this confession only became part of Eastern Germany after 1939, either due to evacuation or because they were chased from their homes. 1.1 million Roman Catholics left the GDR between 1950 and 1961. This figure is symptomatic of an overall turbulent demographic evolution: this region numbered 16.7 million inhabitants in 1939, 18.5 million in 1946, and 19.1 million in 1947. The population growth is explained by the advent of innumerable refugees from regions to the East of the Oder-Neisse frontier and the homecoming of prisoners of war.101 Beginning in 1950, this movement was reversed, largely because of fugitives who left the democratic Republic for the Federal Republic (roughly 2.7 million from 1949 to 1961). In the zone of the GDR after 1949 (formerly the Soviet-occupied zone), political decisions concerning churches were marked by restraint. This attitude is explained by the moral support which churches constituted in rebuilding the country. Most inhabitants adhered to one of eight regional Protestant Churches or were members of the Roman Catholic Church. The direction of the socialist party (Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, SED) could not set aside these Protestant Churches at this stage since they were part of the powerful federation of Protestant Churches of the two German states—the Lutheran-Evangelical Church in Germany (Evangelische Kirche Deutschlands, EKD), founded in 1948. This latter was one of the rare institutions still uniting the two Germanys. The SED hoped to influence FRG politics via the church. It feared the power of the churches and did not want to affront them directly during the phase of their establishment. It tried to neutralize them through privileges. This period ended in 1948 with the restructuration of the SED according to the soviet model. Henceforth their politics moved in a confrontational direction. The soviet military administration and the SED tried to use the churches

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 80

25-09-2021 09:26:16

The Current “Religious” Context

81

for their own political ends in general, and in particular for their interests in Western Germany. They tried conjointly to diminish the churches’ influence in the GDR; this strategy failed. The SED abandoned its restrained approach, designating the church as its chief enemy, to be liquidated at all cost. The SED wanted to push the church out of public space and confine it to its worship alone, to make it abandon its role as “the People’s Church” (Volkskirche) and either replace it in this position or separate the church from the state. Open repression of the Protestant church broke out in 1952, involving the prohibition of religious teaching in schools, persecution of student chaplaincies, the fight against the youth movement Junge Gemeinde, and the secularization of ecclesial institutions. Church direction protested these directives with the soviet administration. The sanctions stopped in June 1953 following intervention from Moscow. The president of the GDR apologized to the church; the church seemed to have triumphed at the end of the conflict. But their victory was short lived. Moscow had no misgivings about the goal of the SED’s politics, but only the chosen means. A new politics took its place, which was clearly differentiated toward the churches. From 1954 onward, the SED approved state interventions such as provoking a separation between church direction and adherents, isolating “reactionary forces,” and refining repressions to handicap church functioning on all levels. The objective was obvious: dominate the church from the inside. The most important decision against the churches made in the same ­meeting—which would later prove to be the fatal blow—was the introduction of a secular pseudo-confirmation, the Jugendweihe. The political bureau explained it by referring to the requests of parents who no longer had links with the churches, but who wanted a solemn rite for their children. These children left primary school and started a new phase in their lives. An alternative rite had to be inaugurated precisely to celebrate this passage. This rite basically had the formal allure of a confirmation: it involved a preparatory course providing an introduction to atheist materialism and its principal doctrines. It took place the same day as church confirmations and was combined with a family party. With the Jugendweihe, the SED pursued a dual strategy: to an outside observer, it lacked an overtly offensive or atheist character, since its free participation, “scientific” quality, and philosophical neutrality were emphasized. From the inside, it had to effectively serve the propaganda of atheism and the destruction of links with churches. The SED did not directly expose itself to possible negative reactions from society, but delegated its application to para-state committees. The (Roman Catholic and Protestant) churches reacted vehemently against this project, presenting their youth and parents with an exclusive choice: either confirmation or the Jugendweihe. A youth who chose the Jugendweihe was no longer allowed into confirmation. This secular rite remained an object which crystallized

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 81

25-09-2021 09:26:17

82

Chapter 2

church resistance against SED politics until 1989. The churches considered this rite of replacement to be a provocation of their original ecclesial rite. They expressed their refusal of Marxist ideology in this Ersatz rite. They protested the pressure placed on the youth. For the first few years they had some success, but the SED direction altered the content of this rite in 1956, making it a veritable state-recognized confirmation. Fourteen-year-olds had to solemnly swear their solidarity with the communist state. Youths who did not undergo the Jugendweihe could no longer obtain the equivalent of a high-school diploma and their professional choices were limited. This restrictive new politics bore fruits: in 1959, 80% of youths opted for this rite. The SED’s politics of differentiation also broke the unity of the churches. Certain regional Protestant Churches no longer systematically excluded Jugendweihe participants from confirmation. Confirmation itself changed in character. The old traditional rite of passage transformed into an act of explicit confession. But the churches could only win this arm-wrestling match on the condition of being able to plausibly explain the difference, the contradiction between the two rites—which they could not. From 1963 onward, the new “tradition” had replaced the old ecclesial rite and the churches had to find a new pragmatic approach to the question. Parallel to the Jugendweihe struggle, the churches fought the battle for religious teaching, which was increasingly excluded from school. School henceforth became an ideological institution promoting the merits of Leninist Marxism. The ecclesial tax was no longer collected by the state after 1956. These new orders were unconstitutional in principle, but the churches already lacked the strength to defend their rights. They had to accept their new position within the population of the GDR. Another goal of SED politics consisted of weakening churches’ structures. Of course, the EKD’s existence as a supra-state organization of both Germanys opposed this policy. It was thus necessary to provoke the church’s scission with this latter. Measures were undertaken to hamper its functioning, but only with the construction of the Berlin wall in 1961 did the Protestant Churches in the GDR understand that their state was there to stay, and that they should abandon their fundamental opposition. The new constitution of the RDA (1968) no longer allowed for the integration of churches into the EKD because they had to completely identify with the socialist society of the GDR. They thus created their own federation, leaving the EKD. The Federation of Protestant Churches in the GDR (Bund evangelischer Kirchen, BEK) was not recognized by the state until 1971. Protestant Churches hoped for better representation before the state and for better recognition of their interests. But they also had to redefine their relation with society, since they had become a minority. Discussions within the Protestant church in the 1970s resulted in the formula “the Church in socialism.”102 It could no longer claim

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 82

25-09-2021 09:26:17

The Current “Religious” Context

83

its former position as the “People’s Church.” But neither did this church want to limit itself to its function of worship, since it highly valued its ministry as a witness toward society. At minimum, it wanted to remain a Church for the People, with all the difficulties implied by state constraints upon which it entirely depended. The new formula allowed for different interpretations, but above all it opened the door for the normalization of church-state relations. The Protestant church accepted the societal system of the GDR, but from its own perspective it skirted the two dangers of adaptation and total resistance. The government changed its politics around 1978, granting the church unrestricted freedom of worship, freedom to organize its internal functioning, and the collection of ecclesial taxes. The state continued to subsidize certain activities. As a minority church, the powerless status of the Protestant church allowed it to adopt a more offensive stance. It wanted to expand its influence on television and radio, to obtain new building permits, support for confessional preschools, and improvements to various chaplaincies. Despite restrictions placed on it, the church’s desire to continue informing society was also visible in 1980s synods examining peace, ecology, and human rights. The World Council of Churches’ conciliar process for justice, peace, and preserving creation catalyzed efforts of GDR movements which felt equally concerned by such themes. Several social movements were subsequently connected with Protestant Churches. These churches’ analysis of society was increasingly adopted by these movements. The demand for reform resulting from this diagnosis was taken up by all of these groups which were active at the dawn of reunification.103 Contemporary Religious History, 1989–2003 The unexpected political change marked by the 1989 fall of the Berlin wall surprised the churches as well. The transitory period from the overturning of the old GDR political system until the reunification of the two Germanys in 1990 happened without excessive violence, in large part due to the attitude of the churches. Through their calls to prayer the churches had prepared this “peaceful revolution,” and they served as intermediaries between the protagonists of the opposition and the representatives of the GDR. Many observers expected a religious renewal in the New States because of the churches’ positive role in this process, an evolution which would be followed by all countries under the Soviet Union’s influence (with the exception of Poland). But history took a different turn. At the creation of the GDR in 1949, 92% of the population was part of the two churches. Forty-one years later, the year of this state’s disappearance, no more than 30% of the population were Christians (25% Protestants and 4% Roman Catholics). The category of persons without confessional ties had multiplied by roughly ten times

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 83

25-09-2021 09:26:18

84

Chapter 2

during the four intervening decades, finishing at roughly 70%. To truly grasp the extent of this drastic change, the figures must be compared with those of the FRG for the same period. In 1950, 96% of the West German population belonged to a church. In 1990, 85% still belonged. The reduction in numbers in GDR churches implied that they accepted their minority status. By contrast, given this new status in society, one might expect greater engagement from church members. But its members’ behavior was hardly different from that of FRG citizens. They generally adopted a conventional attitude toward their churches, just like the members of FRG churches. The theory according to which a minority group develops a markedly militant attitude is not confirmed in this scenario. We propose two reasons for this: first, the social profile of church members was primarily situated among the non-active population, including the elderly and those with inferior professional diplomas. Second, the churches maintained their parochial structures, continuing to propose the same services to a dwindling public; they did not change their strategy. After 1989, the evolution continued in the direction of a considerable diminishment of the Protestant church’s position in society, even though Christians no longer suffered from a constraining political regime and despite the factual reestablishment of religious freedom. (1) This loss of influence is measurable by the numbers of new and departing church members, and by the confidence which churches inspired as institutions. The number of persons leaving churches was already high during the seventies and eighties in the former GDR. This figure was hardly compensated by those entering churches at the end of the eighties. But the reunification and introduction of the Deutsche Mark considerably increased the number of those turning to their backs on the churches. These numbers peaked in 1992: more than 100,000 adherents left the regional Protestant Churches in this year. Afterward, this figure remains divided by four until 1997. The preeminent reason proposed by those concerned concerns the ecclesial tax. For obvious reasons, East Germans esteemed the churches very highly in 1991. But this confidence diminished from year to year after. These observations to the detriment of the churches must not hide that these latter had nevertheless regained a certain terrain in society. The churches were suddenly faced with new opportunities with the end of repression and of their systematic societal isolation. These new possibilities which they did not dare to dream of before included the diaconate, religious teaching in schools, and an unrestricted role in public space. Christians no longer had to fear sanctions for openly confessing their faith. Protestants thus saw new persons coming to church. The number of new adherents tripled, attaining 24,000 in

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 84

25-09-2021 09:26:18

The Current “Religious” Context

85

1994. This figure dropped again to roughly 8,000 members per year in 1997. (2) The number of baptisms indicates an evolution which contradicts the fall of church influence. The Protestant church’s figure concerning the number of those born anew doubled between 1989 and 1991, attaining almost 30% (roughly 31,400 persons). This rate dropped to 16.8% in 1997. The Roman Catholic Church also saw a slight increase in its baptism rates. (3) A third element opposing the thesis of the loss of churches’ social links consists in a strong church attendance compared with the number of registered church members. The Roman Catholic Church maintained a rate of participation slightly above 20%, while the Protestants attendance grew (even though it largely remained inferior to the other confession’s figures). On average, persons going to church services in Eastern Germany have surpassed 5% since 1994. This trend has now been inverted in relation to church attendance in the Western part of the country. In terms of percentage, eastern Germans frequent worship services more than Western Germans. Still, these three positive evolutions have not managed to counter the church’s loss of entrenchment in society and the regression of its integrative strength. The churches were partly responsible for this failure since they made only partial use of new opportunities to change their situation.104 Forty years of SED power produced profound changes via a repressive and ideological kind of forced secularization. The SED wanted to remove the churches from their privileged position at all costs, to take their place. When this repression peaked, secularizing effects automatically set in. Fewer and fewer persons became members of churches. Automatically, fewer were baptized, and more and more youths took the Jugendweihe. The correlation of these factors had a reciprocally amplifying effect. At the end of this evolution, before reunification, one category dominated GDR society: persons without any church adherence. The SED had successfully managed to halt an ancient Christian tradition anchored in eastern German society, a halt which the new freedom offered to the churches since reunification has not been able to slow down or overturn. RELIGIONS AND BELIEFS The important “Aufbruch” study led in ten post-communist countries conducted a survey among the population of the New States in 1997. The results were submitted to factorial analysis to bring out types of distinct “milieux”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 85

25-09-2021 09:26:18

86

Chapter 2

defined by a style of life and conception of the world. Researchers isolated five different groups:105 (1) The first “milieu” includes persons who believe in God. These people put their confidence in a creating God, a personal God who gives meaning to all areas of lived existence. This God corresponds to the one proclaimed in the churches. Faith is not reduced to the worship service, but also informs politics, economics, and the family. It is an important element for obtaining personal happiness. The analysis shows the importance of the relation between belonging to a church and faith, and to a lesser extent, the relation between faith in God and a preference for a (Christian) political party. This group is primarily composed of persons aged more than fifty-three years old, Catholics and Protestants. They mostly live in rural areas or city centers. They rarely work in academic professions and in positions of responsibility. The composition of this group roughly corresponds to church members. (2) Persons seeking security106 do not feel particularly at ease in this world which they consider more as a threat. They seek protection from the state, who should protect them from chaos. They are inclined to offer obedience in exchange. This “milieu” seeks harmony, withdraws into the private sphere and offers little public engagement. The goal is not to distinguish oneself or to attract the attention of others. This group loves conviviality, order, modesty; all novelty is refused. They exhibit fear of the incalculable and unpredictable future. The persons of this group have often suffered personal hardship. They are primarily interested in information relating to their daily life. Their political choices are motivated by the same search for security. They thus vote mostly for established parties, avoiding any radical political programs. The correlation between members of a church and persons in this group demonstrates a rather notable incompatibility; the further we stray from the church, the closer we come to the “milieu” of those seeking security. We find mostly elderly in this group, with slightly more Protestants than Roman Catholics. They mostly populate the rural world. Only rarely do they hold higher professional positions, often working rather as skilled laborers or in agriculture. The composition of this group thus resembles that of the first “milieu,” though its members’ conservative opinions set it apart. (3) The third group, dubbed “individualism,” is in opposition with the preceding group. The individual no longer endures the order of this world but has the task of constructing their own vision of the world. This “milieu” corresponds rather well to that of the 1980s in Western Germany, in which some persons promoted self-emancipation. In light of its cardinal characteristic, this group is very heterogeneous, but the manner

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 86

25-09-2021 09:26:18

The Current “Religious” Context

87

in which these persons construct the meaning of their life is comparable. They are centered on themselves and wish to develop their inner being. They are open to new experiences and change. They easily seek contact with others, are flexible and develop strong confidence. The members of this group prefer to live in cities. They are dynamic and love changing places and relations. Comparison with church members reveals that this group also exists among Christians. But the individualism group is mostly composed of non-church members under forty-three years old. The majority work in posts of responsibility, with many working as selfemployed or freelance workers. (4) The next “milieu” is composed of those happy with the new political system resulting from the reunification of the FRG. Researchers call this group “Wendestolz,” which means those who are proud of the changes which happened in 1989. In this case, “pride” should not be heard as “haughtiness,” but must be understood in the political sense because the FRG guarantees the rights of citizens and seeks social justice. The members of this group declare that the inhabitants of the New States have never been as happy as after 1989. This “milieu” is very well represented among those aged twenty-three–thirty-two years old and among those without Christian confession. They live primarily in urban areas and often work in academic professions or as skilled laborers. (5) By contrast, the fifth group, “social solidarity,” includes those who are discontent with the current state of society. They cry out against social inequalities and fight for the redistribution of material goods. This idea is primarily present among those who are fifty-three to sixty-five years old. The confessional composition of this group generally corresponds to the overall population. Those belonging to this “milieu” often come from average or inferior social strata, including many unskilled laborers and inactive persons (notably the unemployed). This population felt particularly disadvantaged following the reunification, considering itself the losers in the new arrangement. Researchers involved in the “Aufbruch” study have thus sketched several types of groups in eastern German society without claiming to give a complete picture. The various factors analyzed and synthesized allow for the description of several representations of the world present in society. It has shed light on the positioning of members within the church and of persons outside it, as well as religious opinions more generally. Clearly, those with the strongest connection to a church largely belong to the first group presented. The results of the “Aufbruch” study present the following picture of the religious landscape barely ten years after the fall of the Berlin wall: threequarters of the population are not church members, and there are no tangible

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 87

25-09-2021 09:26:19

88

Chapter 2

signs of this trend’s reversal. It is supposed that the loss of church membership will continue in coming years. Two-thirds of eighteen to twenty-twoyear-olds were never members of a church; they inherited this status, so to speak. This status has imposed itself as the new norm unperturbed by the change in political regimes. It has even been consolidated, for roughly only half of parents who are members of a church “transmit” their belonging to their children. However, 98% of parents who do not belong to a church “bequeath” this status to their children. Indifference toward the “religious” is thus the dominant trait in eastern regions of Germany. As far as churches are concerned, inhabitants of this region generally avoid expressing their opinion. But even beyond church members, only one-quarter of society defines themselves as “religious.” Religiosity is most often linked to these Christian criteria.107 What can we say concerning the relation between the high rate of those without ecclesial attachments and the possible development of religiosity outside the churches? Has the loss of church members been compensated with the renewal of New Religious Movement-type religiosity, or other forms of privatized religion? Some observers have indeed formulated such hypotheses. Detlef Pollack highlights that churches experienced some consolidation of their situation after 1989, but only for a short time. Like the “Aufbruch” researchers, he observes that despite the population’s general indifference to the religious question, it still connects this question with an ecclesial definition. Pollack summarizes several studies highlighting that the phenomenon of religiosity outside the churches plays only a minimal role in society. Pollack cites a study from a German weekly review in 1997: less than 15% of eastern Germans have had experience with esoterism, the occult, New Age religions, Zen meditation, and so on; less than 2% of persons surveyed expressed belonging to non-Christian religions; only 1.2% of people have actually participated in a course proposed by these alternative religious movements; ultimately, only 0.5% of the population of the New States were members of such movements. The only exception concerns adhesion to occult practices, magic, and superstition.108 The most recent figures concerning religious belonging and content have not changed much since 2000. In 2005, 21% of eastern Germans belonged to the Protestant church, 4% to the Roman Catholic Church, and 1–2% to other churches (while 80% of citizens in Western regions were members of a Christian Church). This corresponds to a drop of roughly 5% in the number of Christians in the east in comparison with 1989. 20,000 persons left Protestant Churches in 2004, while roughly 10,000 made the opposite decision. But general demographic data imply that falling numbers in churches are continuing without visible compensation in diffuse and individualist religiosity or in New Religious Movements. Among the younger generation, only a slight opening

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 88

25-09-2021 09:26:19

The Current “Religious” Context

89

and incertitude toward religious questions can be discerned. The theory of secularization seems the most adequate model for explaining the religious situation in Eastern Germany.109 Causes of Secularization In light of comparative studies in other European religious contexts, Eastern Germany seems to be a unique case. And this is true not only within the FRG, but even on an international level. If there is truly a difference between the Old and New States, it is primarily visible in this domain of religion and the church, and much less so in other areas of life. What are the reasons for this state of de facto secularization, such that two-thirds of inhabitants consider themselves to be non-religious?110 The authors propose several possible explanations. (1) The most far-off historical explanation emphasizes the importance of how Christianization played out. The degree of violence employed in initial proclamations of the Gospel would thus have played a determining role. Northern Germany would have undergone a more forced evangelization, with imposed baptisms, in contrast with other regions who enjoyed a less aggressive Christianization. This collective evangelization by constraint would have left traces which remain today and would be partially responsible for this accrued dechristianization in Northern Europe. Geller highlights the importance of the role of religion regarding political power during Christianization. Was religion on the side of political power or on the people’s side when these two sides were in conflict? A sentiment of aversion or approbation toward religion would thus have accordingly implanted itself in the popular mentality. (2) The origin of Christian confessions in sixteenth century Germany represents the second and veritable wave of Christianization in this country. It happened uniquely because of very direct links between the state and Christian confessions. A model of public religions was henceforth imposed, linking Christian Church interests with young national states’ need for legitimacy. (3) This privileged position of churches linked to the state transformed into an inconvenience in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries because the state no longer needed the churches. Dechristianization began long before the industrial era in Protestant cities in the eighteenth-century milieu because the state no longer participated in ecclesial sanctions toward its subjects. The revolution of the bourgeoisie imposed freedom of religion as the most important freedom in the city, which sparked the privatization of religion. The tradition of a state church lasted until

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 89

25-09-2021 09:26:19

90

Chapter 2

the end of the First World War. This proximity with the state was fatal, notably when the Protestant church in the eastern part of the country was confronted by an anti-Christian regime beginning in 1934. (4) Of course, secularization accelerated once the communists took power in Eastern Germany after the Second World War through the active politics of the SED. The goal was to remove the church from public space by all means. The state took on the allure of a pseudo-religion and tried to divide church leaders from church members and to oppose various trends within the churches. The politics of homogenization aimed at the whole GDR bore fruit, with the majority ceding to state pressure. As churches were hemorrhaging members (above all at the end of the 1950s and 1970s) and struggling to uphold confirmation practices, they could not react otherwise. In the case of the Roman Catholic Church, their regression turned into isolation; for the Protestants, it led to seeking a compromise with the SED to limit the loss of their growing influence and retain at least minimal freedom. (5) In addition to political reasons, the process of modernization must be mentioned as a factor of dechristianization. Its impact here was not the same as in Western Europe, but it should not be underestimated, notably in Germany’s significant urban concentrations. Thanks to the rationalization of its economic production, the GDR experienced significant increases in material wealth which surpassed the other communist countries in the former eastern bloc. The country could propose some leisure activities and offer everyone a job without fear of any unemployment whatsoever. (6) The two great migration movements certainly also influenced dechristianization. These included, first, German fugitives from Poland, Czechia, and Hungary due to the war, and second, the westward immigration of those discontent with the GDR political system. (7) In contrast with changes in neighboring communist countries, the freedom of religion practically introduced by the peaceable revolution in 1989 did not spark a religious renewal. Pollack thinks that the rapidity of this change did not leave the people sufficient time to reflect on their relationship to religion. In 1990, the monetary union lowered purchasing power in the Eastern portion of the FRG. Many abandoned their status as church members because their already-distant relation to the church was not worth the price of the ecclesial tax. (8) The Protestant Churches of the former GDR played a primordial role in opposing the communist regime. But their social esteem among the population was somewhat shaken after the 1989 political changes because of their (supposed or real) collaboration with the state secret services (Ministerium für Staatsicherheit, Stasi). This drop in social esteem

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 90

25-09-2021 09:26:19

The Current “Religious” Context

91

was even more pronounced after the “peaceable revolution” of 1989: churches were seen as an institution belonging to the other “side,” among the “conquerors” of West Germany.111 All these reasons evoked contribute to the unique religious situation of the New States. According to Tomka, the political system of the GDR largely succeeded in interrupting cultural continuity: an ancient Christian tradition was replaced by a non-religious culture. East Germans broke with their Christian heritage sooner and more radically than other nations. Atheism is confessed here in a more strict and intensive manner than in other countries. The SED regime accelerated and reinforced this dechristianization, but the influences of this evolution were already present before this regime came to power.112 SYNTHESIS From a “religious” point of view, what common traits might be found among these four countries? In France, Christian Church attendance is dropping and beliefs are declining in general (allowing for nuances and growing “faith” in parasciences). Thirty-one percent of French citizens declare themselves to be without religion (CSA/Le monde des Religions survey 2007) and 14% are convinced atheists (EVS 1999). Fifty-one percent of citizens nevertheless identify with Roman Catholicism. Do these figures translate the persistence of a long-term tendency described by the notion of “Two Frances”? The four countries in the United Kingdom all maintain a different relationship with churches, varying from church-state separation to a church with a limited monopoly. Great Britain experienced religious diversification earlier than France due to different Protestant denominations. The practice and church attendance of Christians has dropped, but the majority of UK citizens (25.5 million) have not followed this logic of “leaving religion” to its conclusion. These persons belonging to this “common religion” maintain distant links with the Anglican Church. This group is thus the most significant among other religious expressions. The Christian “panorama” notably changes from one country, county, and region to another. One can only really speak of religious pluralism in urban contexts. The retreat of practice and adhesion does not signify the end of faith since most UK citizens continue to believe in God. Romania is completely distinct from these two largely “secularized” countries. It did not experience the “liberalization” of the “religious market” before 1989. The byzantine conception of the “symphony” of the two powers continues to structure present-day Romanian society. The influence of the Orthodox Church—a state “recognized religion”—remains omnipresent.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 91

25-09-2021 09:26:20

92

Chapter 2

Other Christian denominations and recognized religions constitute a minority, but they can also count on state financial aid. The third element of the religious field, New Religious Movements, is still marginal due to its relative symbolic poverty. Religious restoration in Romania since 1989 and the Orthodox Church’s deep roots in Romanian society should not hide the fact that many Romanians are moving progressively further from the creed and no longer attend church. Orthodoxy’s central position in public space is ambiguous. What presently seems like an advantage and guarantee of its future stability could also signify the first step toward the secularization of Romanian society. Like Romania, the New states of Germany were part of the old communist bloc of Central-Eastern Europe, but are differentiated by their Protestant religious history. The process of secularization in East Germany (which was not experienced in Romania) began very early in the eighteenth century. It was accelerated by the two totalitarian regimes which ruled this country in the twentieth century. An entire generation of persons “without religion” established itself under the regime of the Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED). Today, it has become the clear norm in this society. An irreversible rupture in the chain of transmission of religious values has thus taken place. Unlike in Romania, no religious awakening followed the “peaceable revolution.” The state of secularization was too well-entrenched to allow for any possible reversal. It is rather difficult to find characteristics common to the religious history of the four countries presented. Certainly, these countries were each forged by one or several traditions within Christianity, but their common heritage was quite quickly divided. Comparing one nation to another—and even among different regions within the same country—the singularity of each country in our religious study is striking. If we place them in the larger context of their confessional backgrounds, we can sketch the following outline. (1) France is part of Catholic Europe, situated in the Western, southern, and central-eastern parts of the continent. It figures among the countries with low rates of religious practice, such as Belgium and Luxembourg, and is foremost in Europe concerning its rate of persons declaring themselves “non-religious.” This is also true of the “convinced atheist” grouping. (2) In contrast with this Roman Catholic space are the Lutheran countries of northern Europe, who might also be seen alongside the Anglican United Kingdom. The religious heterogeneity of this latter is distinguished from the Lutheran countries, whose populations still largely belong to national Lutheran churches (roughly 80% of the total population in 1999). But adhesion does not imply participation; on the contrary, the level of religious practice here is the lowest among other European countries.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 92

25-09-2021 09:26:20

The Current “Religious” Context

93

(3) Romania belongs among Europe’s Orthodox regions. But the eastern part of the continent was not only forged by Orthodoxy. Estonia, the New States of Germany, and Czechia (a religiously Protestant or “mixed” country) are among the most secularized countries in Europe. Eastern Catholic countries (with Poland in the lead, but also Croatia, Slovakia, Lithuania, and Slovenia) exhibit strong religiosity, meaning that they better resisted ideological pressure under communism. As “mixed” countries, Latvia and Hungary are situated between these two groups of countries. Concerning properly Orthodox regions, Romania is distinguished from Bulgaria by its higher rate of “religiosity” (in 1999, 58% of the Bulgarian population belonged to the Orthodox Church, compared with 85% in Romania). Serbian Orthodoxy has seen a return of religious identity during recent conflicts. For Greek citizens, Orthodoxy has long been seen as a national religion. (4) Given their geographic position, the New States of Germany belong to central Europe but religiously, they can also be included in “mixedconfession” Europe (Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany). These countries are divided among Roman Catholic and Protestant confessions. Their churches are directly linked to their respective states. The number of Roman Catholics in the three countries has surpassed the number of Protestants. Churches play an important role in German social and medical life, but the number of persons leaving the two churches remains constant. Switzerland has not seen the same proportion of exodus from churches; most of its inhabitants still maintain ties to these institutions. In the Netherlands, the rate of persons “without religion” is the highest in Western Europe (54% in 1999), even surpassing French figures. Comparing the religious constitution of the four countries leads us to a prudent conclusion. These countries represent neither a typical case vis-à-vis other nations concerning the Christian denomination to which they belong, nor a singularity within the group of states described above concerning their type of “religiosity.” At most, they can mark the limits of an extremely large and diversified element within the European religious field. If we had to situate these limits on the religious spectrum, we could locate these countries at the extremities of this field according to their singularities: (1) Regarding its radical church-state separation, France constitutes one extreme; the privileged ties with Christian denominations found in the three other states constitute the opposite extreme. (2) In some European countries, the inhabitants belong to the majority religion (Romania); in others, inhabitants belong without practicing (Nordic countries). Christianity is already (New States of Germany) or I

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 93

25-09-2021 09:26:21

94

Chapter 2

becoming (France, the United Kingdom) a minority, while in Romania the vast majority of the population still defines itself by orthodoxy. (3) France, the United Kingdom, and the New States of Germany have felt the impact of successive waves of the secularization process, while the pluralization of Romania’s religious field is only beginning. (4) In countries marked by secularization, the New States of Germany is singularly marked by a former state-instituted atheism. Two-thirds of the population do not believe in God. This atheism is largely effective because it translates into acts which cohere with verbal confession. Despite the reestablishment of privileged ties with a state church since 1989, this evolution has not changed. It has surpassed the degree of secularization in France, which is a secular state. (5) “Catholic countries” (France) as well as “Protestant countries” (United Kingdom) might be affected by secularization, but the “Catholic countries” generally began this process later and have resisted it more effectively. In this sense, France is a precursor among other Catholic nations.113 The Judeo-Christian heritage plays a determining role on the continent to the present day. But general erosion of practice among Christians and changes in actual beliefs have provoked a profound mutation of Christianity in Europe, relegating it to a religious minority in several European countries. However, the secularization process has not come to completion since Christianity still mobilizes persons who practice it as a “common religion.” In the European “religious” field we are faced with extremely diversified persons and groups, but also religions and beliefs. The “Religious” belongings and “beliefs” might be summarily described as follows: militant practicing Christians; Christians who regularly go to their church’s events; irregular practitioners; occasional Christians who “consume” or attend major events and rites of passage; nominal Christians (“common religion”) who only allow for sporadic mobilization; Christians consciously or unconsciously identifying with the faith of their nation; believers in God who belong to no church; believers in a dematerialized and depersonalized divinity; those with humanist ideals and Christian or secular tendencies; active adherents of other non-Christian religions; adherents culturally tied to these latter religions; those who define themselves as “without religion”; atheists; and those who believe in spirits and parasciences. We do not need to emphasize here that the borders between the various beliefs and religiosities are fluid, and consequently, that there are myriad reconstructions of these different forms of the “religious.” The inhabitants of the four countries examined are so many examples, representing only some of the religious phenomena in Europe.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 94

25-09-2021 09:26:21

The Current “Religious” Context

95

NOTES 1. Jean-Paul Willaime, “Europe,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 533–550; idem, Europe et religions. Les enjeux du xxie siècle, coll. Les dieux dans la Cité (Paris: Fayard, 2004), 15–51; Karl-Ferdinand Werner, “D’où l’Europe nous vientelle?” in Religions et transformations de l’Europe, Gilbert Vincent & Jean-Paul Willaime, dir. (Strasbourg: PUS, 1993), 19–31. 2. The German term Abendland is not synonymous with the French l’Occident and English West. The Abendland refers more or less to the period in which Western Christianity constituted the primordial influence on European history, that is, from late Christian antiquity until the beginning of secularization in the seventeenth century. Its content corresponds to the French term chrétienté, and thus to the English Christendom as a historical descriptor. 3. Philippe Nemo, Qu’est-ce que l’Occident? coll. Quadrige, essais-débats (Paris: PUF, 2004); on European identity, see Willaime, Europe et religions, 15–72. 4. Nemo, Occident, 57–60, 109–111; cf. Willaime, “Europe,” 535; Johann Oeldermann, “L’orthodoxie, deuxième poumon de l’Europe?”, Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 74–81. 5. As of 2007, 40 million orthodox Christians live in the European Union. 6. Nemo, Occident, 109. 7. Cf. Danièle Hervieu-Leger, “Faut-il définir la religion? Questions préalables à la construction d’une sociologie de la modernité religieuse,” Archives de sciences sociales des religions 32 no. 63/1 (January–March 1987) 11–30; idem, “Religion et modernité,” Le dictionnaire des sciences humaines (Paris: PUF, 2006), 981–983; Willaime, “Pour une définition sociologique de la religion,” in Sociologie des religions, 114–125. 8. Translator’s Note: “Ideal-type” or “pure type” models refer to a concept developed by German sociologist Max Weber 1864–1920). 9. Émile Poulat, “Epistémologie,” in L’Etat des Sciences Sociales en France, dir. Marc Guillaume (Paris: La Découverte, 1986), 399–400. 10. Roland Campiche et al., Croire en Suisse(s) (Lausanne: L’Âge d’Homme, 1992), 35; Willaime, Sociologie des religions, 123. 11. Cf. the sections corresponding to our period in Jean-Marie Mayeur et al., dir., Histoire du christianisme des origines à nos jours (Paris: Desclée, 1997/1995/1990/2000), vol. 10–13, and McLeod & Ustorf, The Decline. (Translator’s note: L’Academie Française, founded in 1635, is an institution of the French government which officially regulates the accepted rules of the French language.) 12. Translator’s note: The Ancien Regime refers to France’s political system before the French Revolution. 13. René Rémond, “L’héritage et la rupture,” in Religion et société en Europe. Essai sur la sécularisation des sociétés européennes aux XIXe et XXe siècles (1789– 1998) (Paris: Seuil, 1998), 27–72. 14. Ibid., 75–106. 15. Ibid., 107–167.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 95

25-09-2021 09:26:22

96

Chapter 2

16. Secularization is a theory describing the retreat of religion from the public to the private sphere. Laicization is a regional process, or the French variant of secularization, marked by a significantly more conflictual history than traditional Protestant societies. 17. Rémond, Religion et société, 207–239. 18. Rémond distinguishes the first era (nineteenth century) from the second era (twentieth century) of secularization, while in the case of France Jean Baubérot locates the first threshold of laicity at the beginning of the nineteenth century and the second threshold at the beginning of the twentieth century. Jean Baubérot, Histoire de la laïcité en France, coll. Que sais-je? (Paris: PUF, 2000). 19. Rémond, Religion et société, 240–275. 20. Baubérot, Histoire de la laïcité, 122–123. 21. Danièle Hervieu-Léger, Le pèlerin et le converti. La religion en mouvement (Paris: Flammarion, 1999), 262–273. 22. This clean separation is rather unique in Europe. Two Latin American countries adopted this political model: Mexico and Uruguay. 23. Émile Poulat, “Ancien Régime et Catholicisme intégral,” in Église contre bourgeoisie. Introduction au devenir du catholicisme actuel (Tournai: Castermann, 1977), 109–133. 24. Ibid., 173–205. 25. Poulat, Liberté, laïcité. 26. Baubérot, Histoire de la laïcité, 75–92. 27. The first rallying in 1892 had been prepared by the famous 1890 “toast of Algiers,” a declaration of cardinal Lavigerie, archbishop of Algiers. 28. Sillon (meaning “furrow” or “groove”) was a journal founded in 1894. Its name was taken up afterward by a social and democratic movement. 29. Action française was a French bi-weekly review which became a daily publication in 1908, representing political ideas of the extreme right. 30. Etienne Fouilloux, “Fille aînée de l’Église ou pays de mission? (1926–1958),” in Société sécularisée et renouveaux religieux (xxe siècle), dir. Etienne Fouilloux et al., Histoire de la France religieuse, vol. IV, dir. Jacques Le Goff and René Rémond (Paris: Seuil, 1992), 129–252; Etienne Fouilloux, “Traditions et expériences françaises,” in Guerres mondiales et totalitarismes (1914–1958), Histoire du christianisme des origines à nos jours, vol. XII, dir. Jean-Marie Mayeur et al. (Paris: Desclée/Fayard, 1990), 451–522; Gérard Cholvy and Yves-Marie Hilaire, 1930/1988, Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine, vol. III (Toulouse: Privat, 1988), 67–166. 31. Translator’s note: The fourth Republic refers to the regime of French government adopted on October 13, 1946, which endured until 1958. 32. Henri Godin and Yvan Daniel, La France, pays de mission? (Paris: L’Abeille, 1943). 33. Fouilloux, “Traditions,” 510–522; Cholvy and Hilaire, La France religieuse; on protestantism, see Jacques Terme, Mutations et crises dans l’Église réformée de France. Le Journal Horizons Protestants 1971–1975 (Lyon: Olivétan, 2007).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 96

25-09-2021 09:26:23

The Current “Religious” Context

97

34. The Lausanne movement was founded during the same period, in 1974. Billy Graham was at the origins of this Evangelical Protestant movement. Might we see in its founding a Protestant reaction parallel to the Catholic evolution? 35. Gérard Cholvy and Yves-Marie Hilaire, “1975: un tournant spirituel?” in Le fait religieux aujourd’hui en France. Les trente dernières années (1974–2004), coll. Petits Cerf-Histoire (Paris: Cerf, 2004), 17–37. 36. Jean-Paul Guetny, “Le succès des obsèques religieuses dans une ‘France païenne’,” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 122–125. 37. Contrary to Catholicism, nineteenth century Protestantism had positively inserted itself in the process of laicization. In the twentieth century, a new, ecumenical strategy toward laicization developed by Marc Boegner, president of the Fédération Protestante de France, replaced earlier preoccupations. According to Baubérot, ecumenism proposed a new functional religious form which allowed the integration of Protestantism into society. The movement reached its zenith in the sixties. Cf. Jean Baubérot, Le retour des Huguenots. La vitalité protestante xixe–xxe siècle (Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 1985), 207–221; idem, Le protestantisme doit-il mourir? (Paris: Seuil, 1988), 71–92. 38. In 2010, the Evangelical current counted 2,068 local Churches in metropolitan France. Cf. “Supplément. Étude statistique et cartographique. Les Églises protestantes évangéliques en France. Situation 2010,” in Annuaire Évangélique 2011, 257–268. 39. Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 39–240; René Rémond, “Un chapitre inachevé (1958–1990),” in Société sécularisée et renouveaux religieux (xxe siècle), 347–459. 40. Cf. Jacques Sutter, La vie religieuse des Français à travers les sondages d’opinion (1944–1976), 2 vols. (Paris: CNRS, 1984); Guy Michelat et al., Les Français sont-ils encore catholiques? Analyse d’un sondage d’opinion (Paris: Cerf, 1991); idem, L’héritage chrétien en disgrâce (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003); Hélène Riffaut, dir., Les valeurs des Français (Paris: PUF, 1994). 41. Yves Lambert, “Religion: développement du hors piste et de la randonnée,” in Les valeurs des Français. Evolutions de 1980 à 2000, coll. U–Sociologie, dir. Pierre Bréchon (Paris: Arman Colin, 2000), 129–153; idem, “Religion: l’Europe à un tournant,” Futuribles no. 277 (July–August 2002) 129–159; Frédéric Lenoir, “Vers un catholicisme minoritaire?” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 5; Jean- François Barbier-Bouvet, “Sondage exclusif: les catholiques à la loupe,” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 22–28; Chloé Andries, “L’Église à la carte,” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 34–37; Cyril Douillet & Yasmina Khoury, “L’Église de France en chiffres,” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 42–43. 42. Fernand Boulard designed the first map of religious practice in rural zones in 1947, distinguishing three kinds of regions. 43. Gérard Cholvy and Yves-Marie Hilaire, dir., Histoire religieuse de la France. Géographie xixe–xxe siècle (Toulouse: Privat, 2000); Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 241–271. 44. Lenoir, “Catholicisme minoritaire?”; Barbier-Bouvet, “Catholiques à la loupe.”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 97

25-09-2021 09:26:24

98

Chapter 2

45. Lambert, “Hors piste et randonnée,” 149–151. 46. Cf. Danièle Hervieu-Léger, Catholicisme, la fin d’un monde (Paris: Bayard, 2003). 47. Jean-Pierre Bastian, “Pour une redéfinition du concept de minorité religieuse dans l’Europe contemporaine,” in Minorités religieuses dans l’espace européen. Approches sociologiques et juridiques, dir. Jean-Pierre Bastian and Francis Messner (Paris: PUF, 2007), 63–73. 48. Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 104–118. 49. [Translator’s note: The Concordat refers to the 1801 treaty between the Catholic Church and Napoleon reconciling the French state with the Catholic church, recognizing Catholicism as the religion of the majority of French citizens, but no longer as the official religion. While the rest of France abandoned the concordat in 1905, Alsace and Moselle retain it, making church-state relations in these regions an exception to the rest of France.] These figures ought to be treated with prudence because the definitions of “member” in state churches and confessing churches differ. Sinclair stipulates that in the case of Alsace-Moselle, only 9,000 out of 240,000 Protestants regularly participate in worship in 1998, while dominical practice among non-concordatory Protestants figures between 15,000 and 30,000 persons. Cf. Christopher Sinclair, “Le protestantisme alsacien-mosellan: du terroir paroissial à la dispersion conversionniste,” in La recomposition des protestantismes en Europe latine. Entre émotion et tradition, dir. Jean-Pierre Bastian (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004), 223–250; idem (dir.), Actualité des protestantismes évangéliques (Strasbourg: PUS, 2002). 50. Jean-Paul Willaime, La précarité protestante. Sociologie du protestantisme contemporain (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1992); Marianne Carbonnier-Burkard and Patrick Cabanel, Une histoire des protestants en France (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1998), 167–208; Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 226–235; Jean-Marie Mayeur and Jean-Paul Willaime, “Attitudes religieuses et formes de la religiosité,” in Crises et renouveau (de 1958 à nos jours), vol. xiii, 274–283, 293–297. 51. Jean Baubérot and Jean-Paul Willaime, “Le courant évangélique français: un ‘intégrisme protestant’?” Social compass 32, no. 4 (1985) 393–411; Willaime, Sociologie du protestantisme; Sébastien Fath, Du ghetto au réseau. Le protestantisme évangélique en France (1800–2005) (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2005). 52. Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 88–103. 53. Ibid., 84. 54. Cf. Frédéric Lenoir, Le Bouddhisme en France (Paris: Fayard, 1999). 55. Cholvy and Hilaire, Le fait religieux, 118–141. 56. This survey data must be taken hesitantly as serious statistical estimations place Protestants at only 1.58% of the population (1 million out of the total French population of 63 million). It is also necessary to examine the number of 650,000 Lutheran-Reformed Protestants more closely, posing serious questions regarding membership lists to distinguish between active adherents, members, “festive” Protestants (e.g., those who go to Church only at Christmas and Easter), and nominal Protestants. 57. Barbier-Bouvet, “Catholiques à la loupe”; Lambert, “Hors piste et randonnée,” 136.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 98

25-09-2021 09:26:24

The Current “Religious” Context

99

58. The EVS derives from a network of social science researchers founded in 1978 in the Netherlands. It gathers an array of emipirical data on moral values and religiosity of the inhabitants of various European countries through survey campaigns. 59. Hervieu-Léger, Le pèlerin. 60. Lambert, “Hors piste et randonnée,” 136–149. Cf. Julien Potel, “Morts, aprèsmort et au-delà: des croyances perturbées,” in L’héritage chrétien en disgrâce, dir. Guy Michelat et al. (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003), 159–192. 61. Lambert, “Europe tournant,” 134–135; Barbier-Bouvet, “Catholiques à la loupe,” 23. Cf. Sylvette Denèfle, Sociologie de la sécularisation. Être sans religion en France à la fin du XXe siècle (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997). 62. Daniel Boy, “Les Français et les parasciences: vingt ans de mesure,” Revue française de sociologie 43, no. 1 (January—March 2002) 35–45. 63. Guy Michelat, “L’univers des croyances,” in L’héritage chrétien en disgrâce, dir. Guy Michelat et al. (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003), 69–124, 77–81. 64. Grace Davie, La religion des Britanniques. De 1945 à nos jours, coll. Histoire et société no. 34 (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1996). Cf. idem, “Croire sans appartenir: le cas britannique,” in Identités religieuses en Europe, coll. “Recherches,” dir. Grace Davie and Danièle Hervieu-Léger (Paris: La Découverte, 1996), 175–194. 65. Cf. Davie, “Le sacré et le profane: le religieux d’une génération à l’autre dans l’Angleterre contemporaine,” in La religion des Britanniques, 57–74. 66. Grace Davie, The Sociology of Religion (London: SAGE, 2007), 135–137. 67. Cf. Christian Civardi, “L’Église d’Écosse et la société depuis 1945,” in Religion et politique en Grande-Bretagne, dir. Monica Charlot (Paris: Presses de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, 1994), 23–38. 68. Davie, La religion des Britanniques, 82–88. 69. Ibid., 88–92. 70. This group includes Baptist, Methodist, independent, Pentecostal, and “other churches.”  71. For the free Churches and other religions, see Davie, La religion des Britanniques, 93–102. 72. For statistical data from the April 29, 2001 census, see the following websites: http:​/​/www​​.stat​​istic​​s​.gov​​.uk​/c​​ci​/nu​​gget.​​a​sp​?i​​d​=954​; http:​/​/www​​.stat​​istic​​s​.gov​​ .uk​/c​​ensus​​2001/​​profi​​les​/c​​ommen​​tarie​​s​/uni​​t​ed​_k​​ingdo​​m​.asp​; http:​/​/www​​.stat​​istic​​s ​ .gov​​.uk​/c​​ensus​​2001/​​profi​​les​/c​​ommen​​tarie​​s​​/eth​​nicit​​y​.asp​ ; http://www​.eurel​.info​/FR​/ index​.php (accessed June 26, 2008). 73. Philip Jenkins, God’s Continent. Christianity, Islam and Europe’s Religious Crisis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 57–58. 74. Davie, La religion des Britanniques, 107–119. 75. Ibid., 119–128. 76. Davie, “Believing without Belonging,” in La religion des Britanniques, 129–159. 77. Grace Davie, “Is Europe an Exceptional Case ?” The Hedgehog Review (Spring–Summer 2006), 23–34.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 99

25-09-2021 09:26:25

100

Chapter 2

78. For these two models, cf. Ibid., 24–29. For the three models developed by Davie, cf. Davie, Sociology, 137–148. 79. Laurentiu D. Tanase, “Les nouveaux mouvements religieux en Roumanie de la chute du communisme à aujourd’hui,” doctoral thesis at Université Marc Bloch, Strasbourg, 2005. This thesis was published as Pluralisation religieuse et société en Roumanie, coll. EHS, Series XXII, Sociologie no. 422 (New York: Peter Lang, 2008). 80. Tanase, “Mouvements religieux,” 56. 81. This latter group is a kind of “brethren” church. 82. Tanase, Pluralisation religieuse, 17–52. 83. For Gillet, relations between the Orthodox Church and the state were really more complex under the communist regime. According to this thesis, the Orthodox Church’s language and ecclesiology relied on its byzantine tradition, a model which included no complete separation between religious and political powers. The two powers formed two distinct entities which were interdependently connected. The sought-after ideal was a perfect equilibrium between the two, the so-called byzantine “symphony.” This “harmony” was not attained for centuries. It finally allowed this unnatural fusion between the Orthodox Church and the communist regime, with the goal of avoiding disequilibrium between the two powers at any cost, including at the price of the enslavement of the Orthodox Church. For the complete analysis, see Olivier Gillet, Religion et nationalisme. L’idéologie de l’Église orthodoxe roumaine sous le régime communiste, coll. Spiritualités et pensées libres (Brussels: University of Brussels, 1997). 84. Tanase, Pluralisation religieuse, 52–81. 85. Tanase, “Mouvements religieux,” 152. 86. Tanase, Pluralisation religieuse, 83–143. 87. Ibid., 143–157. 88. These official figures are contested by the Greek Catholic church. According to the press office of the Archbishopric of Blaj (the seat of the Church), in 1948 the Church possessed 2,500 places of worship. In 2008, there were 370 churches, 215 chapels, and 44 churches in operation. After 1989, 193 churches were retroceded by the Orthodox Church and 177 new churches were constructed. The ecclesial authorities do not accept the governmental statistics; rather, they are based on figures from the 2005 annual pontifical publication, which counted 737,900 adherents in 2003. 89. Tanase, Pluralisation religieuse, 157–168. 90. Ibid., 168–226. 91. Primarily, we refer to the important “Aufbruch” study carried out in ten Eastern European countries in 1998: Lithuania, East Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia et Croatia. The results were published in the collection “Gott nach dem Kommunismus” by Schwabenverlag, first in two volumes conveying the fundamental results, then in three volumes describing each country analyzed. The publication treating Romania has not yet been released. But it must be noted that those conducting the survey analyzed only Transylvania and not the entire country. See Miklos Tomka and Paul M. Zulehner, Religion in den Reformländern Ost (Mittel) Europas, coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus (Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 1999); Religion im gesellschaftlichen Kontext Ost

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 100

25-09-2021 09:26:26

The Current “Religious” Context

101

(Mittel) Europas, coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus (Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2000); Miklos Tomka et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Ungarn, Litauen, Slowenien, coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus (Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 1999); Libor Prudky et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Tschechien, Kroatien, Polen, coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus (Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2001); Karl Gabriel et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: DeutschlandOst, coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus (Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2003). See also Detlef Pollak et al., dir., Religiöser Wandel in den postkommunistischen Ländern Ost- und Mitteleuropas, coll. Religion in der Gesellschaft no. 6 (Würzburg: Ergon, 1998); idem, “La restauration religieuse en Europe de l’Est,” Social Compass 49, no. 4 (December 2002); idem, “Religiousness Inside and Outside the Church in Selected Post-communist Countries of Central and Eastern Europe,” Social Compass 50 no. 3 (September 2003) 321–334; Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, dirs., Eastern European Religion, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 5 (Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2006); Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, dirs., Church and Religious Life in Post-Communist Societies, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 7 (Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2007). 92. Andrei Roth, “Religiöse und kirchliche Entwicklungen in Rumänien nach 1989,” in Religiöser Wandel in den postkommunistischen Ländern Ost- und Mitteleuropas, coll. Religion in der Gesellschaft no. 6, Detlef Pollak et al., dir. (Würzburg: Ergon, 1998), 317–345; Sorin Gog, “Patterns of Religiosity in Romanian Society,” in Revay and Tomka, Eastern European Religion, 183–201; Malina Voicu, “How Secular is Romania?” in Revay and Tomka, Eastern European Religion, 203– 222; idem, “Religiosity and Religious Revival in Romania,” in Revay and Tomka, Church and Religious Life in Post-Communist Societies, 13–32; Iuliana Conovici, “The Romanian Orthodox Church after 1989. Social Identity, National Memory, and the Theory of Secularization,” in Revay and Tomka, Church and Religious Life in Post-Communist Societies, 173–182. 93. Miklos Tomka, “Introduction,” Social Compass 49 no. 4 (December 2002) 483–495; Miklos Tomka, “Tendances de la religiosité et de l’orientation vers les Églises en Europe de l’Est,” Social Compass 49 no. 4 (December 2002) 537–552. 94. This terminology derives from economics, where it designates a theory in which an economic capacity to produce more goods is the most effective way to stimulate economic growth. Voicu applies this theory to the “religious” domain. 95. Voicu, “Religiosity in Romania,” 13–32. 96. Gog, “Religiosity in Romania,” 183–201. 97. Voicu, “How Secular,” 203–222. 98. Conovici, “Orthodox Church after 1989,” 173–182. 99. Olivier Clément, L’Église orthodoxe, 7th ed. (Paris, PUF, 2002). 100. Gillet, Religion et nationalisme. 101. The Oder-Niesse line is the border between Germany and Poland. 102. This formula characterized the church-state relations of the Protestant Church. The Roman Catholic Church chose a similar approach, a third way between conformism and resistance, hoping to allow for pastoral continuity without provoking persecutions from the political power. Josef Pilvousek, “Widerstand und

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 101

25-09-2021 09:26:26

102

Chapter 2

Konformismus,” in Gabriel et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Deutschland-Ost, 19–29. 103. Our analysis in this section has followed Margaret Manale, “Les rapports entre l’Église et l’État en RDA: Protestantisme et politique à l’Est de 1949 à 1990,” in Les religions à l’Est, dir. Patrick Michel (Paris: Cerf, 1992), 87–107; Helmut Geller, “Verhältnis Kirche—Staat in der DDR,” in Gabriel et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Deutschland-Ost, 197–214. 104. Detlef Pollack, “Der Wandel der religiös-kirchlichen Lage in Ostdeutschland nach 1989,” in Säkularisierung, ein moderner Mythos? (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), 108–131. 105. Geller, “Die Kirchen in der DDR,” 241–341. 106. In German, those seeking Geborgenheit, which means roughly to “be sheltered,” with “security” perhaps best approximating the expression. 107. Geller, “Die Kirchen in der DDR,” 262–324. 108. Pollack, Säkularisierung, 88–92, 124–128, 132–148. 109. Thomas Schmidt and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr, “Still the Most Areligious Part of the World: Developments in the Religious Field in Eastern Germany since 1990,” International Journal of Practical Theology 7 no. 1 (2003) 86–100; Detlef Pollak, “Die Entwicklung von Religion und Kirche in Ost- und Westdeutschland seit 1990,” in Woran glauben? Religion zwischen Kulturkampf und Sinnsuche, dir. Gerd Nollmann and Herrmann Strasser (Essen: Klartext, 2007), 78–107. 110. Miklos Tomka, “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern—im internationalen Vergleich,” in Gabriel et al., Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Deutschland-Ost, 349. 111. Geller et al., “Die Kirchen in der DDR,” 324–336; Tomka, “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern,” 360–368; Pollack, Säkularisierung, 95–107, 128–131. 112. Tomka, “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern,” 351, 68. 113. Pierre Bréchon, “Les recompositions flottantes du croire,” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 136–145; Jean-Paul Willaime, “Reconfigurations ultramodernes,” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 146–155; Pollak, “Religiousness Inside and Outside”; Tomka, “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern”; Lambert, “Europe tournant”; Jean-Pierre Bastian, “Les religions dans l’espace européen” in L’Europe à la recherche de son âme. Les Églises entre l’Europe et la Nation (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1999) 15–27; idem, “La foi en situation. Considérations sociologiques sur les croyances et les pratiques religieuses contemporaines,” in Kaempf, Introduction à la Théologie Pratique, 60–70.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 102

25-09-2021 09:26:27

Chapter 3

Contextual Characteristics

With its approach adopting the methodology of sociology of religions, the preceding chapter partially provided us with material for the first pole of our contextualization model. This pole, “context,” requires explanations and specifications. (1) “Context” primarily refers to a linguistic element. It offers a signification without which the element cannot be understood. In a larger sense, context defines the circumstances in which a fact or event is inscribed. (2) American researchers Birdwhistell and Schefflen have developed a “contextual analysis” which emphasizes communication systems. This is an interactive communication model. (3) Practical theologians have integrated parts of these studies in their own program; Félix Moser, for example, would like for practical theology to give particular attention to the communicative contexts in which the Gospel is announced.1 (4) Liberation theology has radically changed both the content and method of theology. Priorities have shifted in favor of “praxis” (i.e., action); theology only serves as a reflection of this practice. The hermeneutical foundation sustaining this theology places central importance on context (history, political circumstances, given social facts), to which we can even attribute an elevated quality of divine revelation of its own.2 (5) Finally, “context” has been an object of reflections in homiletics, in which it is assimilated to the “application” of preaching.3 Our work employs the notion of “context” within the model of a contextualized theology. This chapter will explore and detail characteristics of present-day European culture for a Western missiology. These characteristics will 103

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 103

25-09-2021 09:26:27

104

Chapter 3

then enter in dialogue with the other pole, “theological criteria” (chapter 4). These latter will be chosen and developed as a function of their pertinence as adequate or prophetic propositions vis-à-vis the contextual characteristics. The goal is to create a fruitful correlation between the two poles, resulting in a critical and theologically innovative contextualization. A characteristic is a distinctive element which permits the recognition of part of Western culture in its particularity. Criteria derive from our analysis and present themselves as a value which in turn allows for appreciative judgment of an object. The three missiologists presented below develop both characteristics and contextual criteria. Their studies will be described in this chapter and chapter 4, in the sections “Contextual Characteristics of the Three Missiologists” and “The Three Missiologists’ Theological Criteria.” We have gathered and summarized their insights here with slight modifications. The characteristics and criteria in the section “Other contextual criteria” derive from our own analyses. These sections often begin by describing a characteristic, and end with the postulate or requirement of a criteria for a missiology of the European/Western context. Nevertheless, in the titles of this chapter, we employ the term “characteristic” and not “criteria” to maintain clarity. The selection of the seventeen characteristics presented in these two sections and their synthesis as criteria is definitively performed in the conclusion to the present chapter. THE NOTION OF CONTEXTUALIZATION IN MISSIOLOGY At the time when western colonial expansion began on a large scale, western Christians were unconscious of the fact that their theology was culturally conditioned; they simply began with the idea that it was super-cultural and universally valid. And once western culture was implicitly considered to be Christian, it likewise went without saying that this culture should be exported along with the Christian faith.4

The practice of the propagation of the Gospel during the colonial era was partially situated within the continuity of the “tabula rasa” tradition of the preceding centuries—that is, as a radical Christian critique of all religious forms and content other than those of occidental Christianity. This firm position, founded on a protection of what saw itself as theological orthodoxy and on a cultural unawareness, saw few exceptions during this era in the history of Christian missions. But missionaries did not rigidly maintain this rigid choice when confronted with the richness of non-Christian religions and autochthonous resistance to the evangelical message. As this missionary approach

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 104

25-09-2021 09:26:28

Contextual Characteristics

105

was no longer effective, it was necessary to find other more flexible ways to reduce the “opposition of pagans.” Thus, the methods of adaptation or accommodation were developed among Roman Catholics, and indigenization among Protestants.5 We might see a first historical experience of adaptation in the brothers Cyril and Methodius, missionaries to the Slavic peoples beginning in the tenth century. They were followed by Matteo Ricci in China and Robert de Nobili in India after the birth of modern mission in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. These two missionaries aimed to communicate the Gospel to the elites of the population, thus “adapting” themselves to the behavior of this slice of society. Accommodation was primarily practiced by the Jesuits. It was contested by other currents within their church, with the quarrels over Chinese and Malabar rites as the most visible of these conflicts. After a rather long prohibition, accommodation was ultimately imposed as a missionary method during the interwar period in the Roman Catholic church, following the revalorization of non-European cultures at that time. Protestantism prefers the term indigenization, which it borrowed from functionalist ethnology (Marcel Mauss, Margaret Mead). It later adopted the missionary vocabulary of the International Missionary Council (IMC). Indigenization implies the implantation of the Gospel in an “indigenous” culture. The three notions describe the missionary effort to “adapt” the evangelical message to its addressees and their culture of origin to facilitate the process of communication. But this accommodation often concerns only the form of Christian faith and is based on a typically Western separation of the form and content of religion. In the final analysis, according to this model, the content of Western theology is not affected by the process of adaptation. This approach is considered as a concession toward autochthonous Christians; only “neutral” elements of the host culture are retained and employed. Elements judged “marred” by “paganism” are set aside. Indigenization is monodirectional, seeing “young churches” as passive, lacking the right to intervene in this process undertaken by missionaries and Western churches alone. The expression “acculturation” originated in North America and was used by North American anthropologists as early as 1880 to designate interactions between different cultures. “Contextual theologies” are the fruit of a correlation between the cultural context of a given place and the message of Christ. The three notions (adaptation, accommodation, indigenization) birthed from different historical circumstances, but strongly resemble one another. Today these methods are considered as outmoded as they remain locked into a functional, superficial, and unilateral logic. They were replaced by the terms “inculturation” and “contextualization.”6 It is worth recalling the origins of these two neologisms.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 105

25-09-2021 09:26:29

106

Chapter 3

(1) The term “contextualization” first appeared in the final declaration emanating from a general assemble of the Theological Education Fund of the World Council of Churches in1972. Its authors revisited the idea of indigenization, going beyond its content with the new expression “contextualization.” According to the definition of these theologians of the third world, contextualization is not only concerned with communicating the Gospel in adequate cultural terms (cf. indigenization), but also encompasses all the expressions of a society impacted by the force of the Gospel. The authors highlight that it must be practiced critically and prophetically; identification of culture and faith is not the ultimate goal. This process is dynamic by nature. Contextualization is concerned with the particularity of a place or a given situation but does not completely enclose itself therein. Its actors know that they are bound to other cultural contexts in the world. Those on-site are the only parties who discern possible potentialities proposed by the concept of contextualization aimed at renewal. (2) A second neologism appeared during the same decade, this time on the Roman Catholic side in the wake of post-conciliar missiology. It was first proffered as an idea (without employing the term) during the synod of the bishops of Africa and Madagascar on evangelization in 1974. The term “inculturation” was pronounced during the 1977 synod on catechesis. The bishops’ message affirmed that catechesis is a factor of inculturation and that the evangelical message is called to implant itself in all cultures, to take them up and transform them. A fuller definition was then produced by Pedro Arrupe, Superior General of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) during the 32nd general congregation. Arrupe compares inculturation with the incarnation of the Christian message in a concrete culture. Two elements characterize this process: the communication of the Christian message must be performed with the elements of this culture. But under the inspiration of this process, the culture itself can also be transformed. As with contextualization, this notion issuing from Roman Catholicism moved away from the concept of adaptation. Which qualities are common to these two notions, and which differentiate them? The two concepts replaced the three historically superseded models cited above. They assume a truly correlational functioning on multiple levels: a mutual relation between those who proclaim and those who hear the Gospel, but also an exchange between the Gospel and a particular culture. The two concepts place the primary responsibility for the direction of this process on the persons inhabiting the precise cultural context. And finally, they exclude all excessive cultural introspection. As for the differences between the two missiological concepts, we cannot give as clear of a response because these have been unclear since their

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 106

25-09-2021 09:26:29

Contextual Characteristics

107

historical beginnings. Neither does the enrichment of the two notions visible in missiological literature allow for a clear distinction. Currently, contextualization and inculturation are often employed synonymously by theologians of both Catholic and Protestant confessions. The original confessional preference is no longer clear. Perhaps interrogating the different axioms on which these models rely might reveal their dissimilitude. The different elements in play cause a concept to fall on one side or the other. (1) The definition of culture from an anthropological perspective is one thing; the vision of the “world” as scripture describes it and theologies interpret it is another. A given culture is an ensemble with both permanent and ephemeral elements, which allows for both its continuity and its evolution. By contrast, the “world” and man more specifically are corrupted by sin from a biblical viewpoint. Everything now depends on the degree of corruption accorded to the sinful state of humanity. We know that paths diverge here because Roman Catholic theology does not go as far as its Protestant twin in stipulating an insurmountable opposition between God and the world. (2) The two motors of transformation within each model proposed by missiologists are incarnation (i.e., the renewal or even “conversion” of a given culture through a possible internal dynamic and the presence of the church; this is thus a model of continuity between culture and Gospel), and the proclamation of the word of God (a prophetic and critical means which highlights the ditch separating God and man, and which preaches salvation in Jesus Christ; this is a model of discontinuity between culture and Gospel). The case of incarnation demands extreme prudence. This emblematic term belongs to metaphorical or analogical language, but it can also take on a much stronger meaning which moves toward the properly theological meaning of the notion (the Gospel must be incarnated in the world like Christ in humanity), or even further, toward a political theology. (3) It is clear that a given theological worldview will unite with a given dynamic of transformation. With its strong anthropological and soteriological conception, the “Roman Catholic” worldview offers greater possibilities for a continuity between culture and Gospel. It will cling to inculturation. Protestant anthropology will not propose such a rapprochement as a starting point. It will rather hold to contextualization in the name of the preaching of the word of God, which alone will transform humanity. The fact that so many Protestants today hold to inculturation through the theological foundation of incarnation might find an explanation in various

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 107

25-09-2021 09:26:29

108

Chapter 3

sources: a reformed theology of the kingdom of God; political theologies in the entourage of the World Council of Churces in the 1960s and afterward; the theologies of correlation of Paul Tillich and Edward Schillebeeckx7; and the North American current of process theologies.8 Here, indeed, rapprochements between these latter Roman Catholic-type models of inculturation are possible, as well as interchangeability of designations. We prefer to leave incarnation in its primary location within Christology. We know that it is often used as a subjacent basis of this or that missiological model. But its possible use should at least be accompanied with an explanation of what is meant by incarnation, which could help prevent its inflationary use. Zorn has the merit of seeking to clarify and separate inculturation from contextualization through a Tillichian method.9 He compares two missiological models with the interpretation of Paul Tillich concerning two theological modes, that is, the contextualization of the “Protestant principle” and the inculturation of the “Catholic substance.”10 We might ask ourselves if such an adaptation of Tillich is not somewhat forced and anachronistic, since Zorn applies it to the genesis of the two definitions thirty years ago; we have already said that these notions have since evolved considerably. But Zorn has the advantage of proposing a fruitful working method. We duly note that the notions of inculturation and contextualization are currently employed synonymously. But we use the term contextualization in our work in Zorn’s sense, to indicate a Protestant perspective of a critical correlation between culture and Gospel, as well as to designate the priority of the transcendent event of the Good News over other multiple contexts. We thus adopt a healthy distance in relation to models of incarnation in missiology. As emphasized in chapter 1, we are writing a missiology for the European/Western context. For this reason, the notions of contextualization and inculturation are called to evolve—perhaps in the direction of inculturation/metatheology11 or toward a critical contextualization.12 PRESENTING THE WORK OF THREE MISSIOLOGISTS As noted in the introduction, we will not analyze the various church declarations which obviously exist in this domain.13 We assemble characteristics for a European missiology primarily from the work of three missiologists: Walldorf, Newbigin, and Bosch.14 In his thesis consecrated to European theologies of mission, the German Protestant missiologist Friedemann Walldorf limited himself to church declarations. Walldorf was born in 1964 in Germany. After studying Protestant theology, he was sent as a Protestant missionary to Spain during the 1990s. His doctoral thesis, defended at the University of South Africa and published

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 108

25-09-2021 09:26:29

Contextual Characteristics

109

as the book cited above, probably birthed out of this experience. Walldorf teaches missiology today at an evangelical faculty of theology in Giessen. James Edward Lesslie Newbigin (1909–1998) was a great figure in the ecumenical movement and one of the best-known missiologists of the twentieth century.15 He studied geography and economics during his youth, turning to theology after his conversion. Consecrated to pastoral ministry, then married, he was sent to Madras in India as a missionary in the Church of Scotland (1936–1946). Named bishop of the new Church of Southern India (after the fusion of Presbyterian, Methodist, and Anglican churches) in 1947 for the diocese of Madura and Ramnad, he become increasingly involved at the global level in the IMC (serving as secretary general from 1959–1961) and in the “Faith and Constitution” movement. Designated secretary general of the “Mission and Evangelization” department of the World Council of Churches (1961–1965), he later refused to become secretary general of the WCC, but accepted his election as bishop of the Presbyterian church in Madras. After returning to the United Kingdom for retirement, he taught for some time in Selly Oak College in Birmingham. He also occupied the post of moderator of the United Reformed Church and completed his active professional life as a pastor in a poor neighborhood in Birmingham. Newbigin is primarily known for his reflections on mission in secularized cultures.16 His programmatic question directs our research: “Can the West be converted?” David Jacobus Bosch (1929–1992) grew up in a rural Afrikaner home in South Africa. In 1948, the National Party rose to power and launched its program of apartheid. The same year, Bosch began his studies in languages and theology at the University of Pretoria. In this environment, he was in closer contact with black members of society. Engaged in a Christian student movement, he felt called to serve God as a missionary. During the 1950s, Bosch was increasingly doubtful of the new political system. He definitively distanced himself from the regime in place during his time in Basel, where he defended a doctoral thesis under Oscar Cullmann. After returning to his country in 1957, he was commissioned as a missionary by his Church (the Dutch Reformed Church) among the Xhosa in Transkei (now part of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa). In 1967, he was offered a professorial post in the small regional theological seminary of his church. But his critical attitude toward his church’s positions (faithful to the politics of the state, opposed to all collaboration with other Churches) marginalized him. He left the seminary for the University of South Africa in 1972. At this time, it was the only interracial university in the country. He spent his entire career there as a professor in missiology and partially oversaw the missiology department. Twenty years later, he died following a car accident. Throughout his life, Bosch remained faithful to his country (and to his Church). He refused to leave it, fighting on-site against apartheid. In1979, he successfully gathered 5,000 Christians

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 109

25-09-2021 09:26:30

110

Chapter 3

from various denominations as a powerful testimony for the church as an alternative society. With a hundred other pastors and professors, he co-signed a 1982 letter to his church openly condemning the apartheid system and inviting his community to unite itself with the “black” churches. Ecumenically, Bosch defined himself as a bridge-builder between the evangelical movement (i.e., the Lausanne Movement and the World Evangelical Alliance) and the World Council of Churches. He participated in meetings of both parties. He was convinced of the poverty of each movement taken individually, without accounting for the worries of the other movements. Bosch also produced considerable missiological literature. His magnum opus Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission remains a work of reference in missiology today. The theology of mission developed in this work is founded on a paradigmatic approach which Bosch borrowed from Thomas Kuhn and Hans Küng. Bosch first described the various models of mission in the New Testament (Matthew-Luke-Paul), then the different historical and paradigmatic stages in missions. We will focus on his last article, posthumously published by his wife for the workgroup “Missiology in the Western Culture.”17 CONTEXTUAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE THREE MISSIOLOGISTS Mission: A Taboo to Break If Henri Godin and Yvan Daniel broke a taboo within French Roman Catholicism with the publication of their book, sixty years later it is uncertain if mission in the West is any less of a category to be avoided.18 We propose several reasons for this taboo’s endurance to the present day. The Ambivalence of the Term The active use of the term “mission” conveys a positive meaning. It is used thus in the vocabulary of management, business, architecture, media, politics, and administration. The passive use of the term, rather, conveys a negative sense. To be the object of a mission is suspect, incompatible with values of modernity such as freedom of conscience and religion. This suspicion is further reinforced when the term includes a religious intention. “Missionary” groups are quickly disqualified, falling under the guillotine of qualifications such as “intolerance” and “manipulation.”19 The Politicization of Evangelization In the process of Europe’s Christianization, evangelization partly employed mission as a political instrument. Once pagan peoples were submitted to

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 110

25-09-2021 09:26:30

Contextual Characteristics

111

Christianity, this type of mission was no longer necessary because the political goal was attained. It is clear that subsequently all notion of mission within the territory of Christendom became obsolete for the newly Christianized society: missions no longer had any point.20 A Modified Practice Over the ages, missionary activity has cost the life of numerous persons; it is thus discredited. This critique is justified in many cases, eras, and churches. Some thus consider that a corrupted Christian practice contrary to the Gospel excludes all amelioration and even all positive practice of mission.21 These accusations would need to be verified on a case-by-case basis.22 Some are justified, others are not. For many, the propagation of Christianity equally signifies protection, liberation, dignity, and peace. The Birth of “Interior Mission” The birth of “interior mission”23 out of the impetus provided by Wichern at the beginning of the nineteenth century—aimed at the evangelization of baptized but non-practicing populations—effectively split the notion of mission into two aspects: “exterior mission” (evangelization among far-off “pagans”) and “interior mission” (evangelization among already-Christianized persons). Despite the advantages of this solution, the pragmatic division of missiones Ecclesiae weakened mission in its very essence in what followed. “Interior mission” moved closer and closer to diaconal practice, which was later visible in the quasi-synonymous usage of “interior mission” and “diaconate.” This reduction benefited the diaconate to the detriment of mission. The Emergence of Missiology in Ecclesiology The emergence of missiology within ecclesiology between 1945 and 1960 pursued a new biblical ideal: the church’s responsibility for the proclamation of the Good News. The integration of missionary authorities into the churches was designed to serve this cause. The intention was praiseworthy but could only benefit mission if the church—who had to assume and bear this task— was vigorous and dynamic. But these mostly state churches, already fighting their own secularization at this time, hardly consummated this new union due to choices of their hierarchy. Instead of being accentuated, the church’s missionary function was thus neglected. A Serious Crisis Global missionary activity experienced a serious crisis beginning in the 1960s, following decolonization and the “young churches” of the majority

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 111

25-09-2021 09:26:30

112

Chapter 3

world rising to autonomy. New relations had to be created between Western “sending churches” and churches built through missionary labor. The “young churches” no longer tolerated the paternalism of the past, openly claiming their autonomy in a tone which varied, even proposing a moratorium (suspending material funds and personnel originating in the West).24 The notion of mission was questioned at the very core of its substance: “Formerly there were problems with Mission, but today it has become itself a problem.”25 The Place of Missiology among the Theological Disciplines If mission was the poor parent of the Western church, it was also neglected as a latecomer among the theological disciplines. Regardless of its place within the disciplinary canon, it was marginalized or excluded. Either missiology was treated within the “quadripartite model”26 (generally under practical theology), or it had its autonomy as a fifth theological discipline. The so-called model of “integration” offered a third way: missiology and its particular contribution were integrated in the other theological branches. None of the three solutions brought missiology out of the shadow of the other theological disciplines. Nor has its situation improved since; on the contrary, chairs of missiology have been most often abandoned or replaced by other disciplines such as ecumenism, feminist theology, or even religious studies.27 The “Religious” in the Private Sphere The historical evolution of secularization and laicization in the West since the French Revolution has seen the emergence of a private sphere alongside the public sphere.28 The processes of desacralization, deinstitutionalization, and deindividualization of contemporary society means that the religious domain in general and mission in particular are relegated to the private sphere. A missionary ambition would thus seem to aim at conquering at least part of this public space. Evangelization in Current Missions Despite its legitimacy, the pressing agenda in current missions described by catchphrases such as “justice, peace, and preservation of creation,” “missionary presence,” “interconfessional dialogue,” or “interreligious dialogue” no longer leaves room for evangelization in the surrounding discourse since it is quickly seen as suspect due to its postulate of a universal truth. The reasons invoked above (among others) mean that “mission” points to a general malaise in Western society, to say nothing of the fact that this notion is not very popular in theology more particularly. Sellmann denounces the taboo, speaking of a culturally “incorrect” term!29 It must also be noted

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 112

25-09-2021 09:26:31

Contextual Characteristics

113

that the practice of evangelization in Christianized countries persists today in milieus from the Protestant Awakening to evangelical churches. The causes of this persistence can be found in a different conception of soteriology and ecclesiology than in Roman Catholic and Reformed-Lutheran state churches. Developing a missiology for the Western world signifies first and foremost breaking a deeply anchored taboo in society and theology. A New Language to Create “Mutism” describes the attitude of one who refuses to speak, whether due to psychic troubles or deliberate choice. Mission implies the verbal communication of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. How is it that the bearers of the evangelical message in the Western world have such trouble in this domain? The overlapping reasons are shared by the witnesses of the Gospel and certain characteristics of this society: (a) The transmission of the content of the Christian faith has been in crisis for several generations. (b) Believers themselves often do not know exactly what they believe because their faith was shared by nearly all those living in these places them from the time of Christendom. There was thus no need for theological competence. The skill of communicating the Good News is thus lacking today; and if it were to exist, Christians would adopt a low profile because in the European context “mission” smacks of intolerance. (c) What is missing among believers is likewise absent from the clergy: theologians are not always adept at linking the experiences of daily life with the Christian tradition and the word of God. (d) The forced or accepted retreat of the religious into the private sphere induced an evaporation of the content of Christian doctrine, and over a longer period, an erosion of religious language. (e) The testimony of the church is weakened by evolutions of the European culture which can be circumscribed by the notions of “pluralism” and “relativism,” which would be in contradiction with the postulate of a universal Christian truth.30 Discourse promoting “dialogue” under all its forms (and particularly interreligious dialogue)31—which is encouraged by the churches—starts from a legitimate missiological requirement but turns into a dead end if the person of whom this competence is demanded has neither a religious conviction nor the appropriate vocabulary. Only someone who knows what they believe and possesses an adequate religious language is capable of such dialogue. These reasons mean that whether consciously or not, Christians and theologians in Western churches today take refuge in a retreat animated by the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 113

25-09-2021 09:26:31

114

Chapter 3

values of the surrounding culture or pseudo-theological motives. The second criterion of a contextual missiology can thus only be an incitation to surmount the barriers of “religious illiteracy.” In his contribution, Hafner distinguishes passive and active linguistic competencies. It is not enough to understand religious ideas passively; they need to be combined into a meaningful whole by an active competency. We might compare this distinction to the difference between knowing a certain vocabulary (passively) and really understanding a language’s syntax, and grammar, which alone allow one to (actively) understand and speak the language. This competence would allow the individual to work out various religious affirmations derived from her own culture or from a different tradition. Concerning the Christian faith, this might involve phrases like “God is merciful.” This declaration would not be understood as a simple affirmation of faith; it would be inserted within a much more complex rule of faith. The confirmed Christian would master these “rules” like a grammar, without necessarily knowing them explicitly. It would be impossible to combine different religious motifs in a coherent manner without having assimilated them. Hafner formulates the following thesis: every person who wants to communicate in the religious domain needs these “rules of faith.”32 With this in mind, we can better understand his postulate according to which people can use the “religious” in their language without necessarily employing religious terms, but this is insufficient for real communication in the domain of beliefs. To speak “the religious” requires more; it requires the “rules of faith.” An individual learns these through a long process beginning with their religion of origin. They could not adopt or critique a new “religion” without the foundation of these “norms.” A change in the domain of the “religious” would always happen on the basis of the original “grammar.” Hafner later proposes a “care of the religious language” which can only be produced if an individual is integrated into a “religious linguistic community” in which she could recognize certain “religious” opinions and experiences. She could subsequently define “rules of faith” and progressively enrich them.33 Inventing a new religious vocabulary would not suffice; it would be necessary to go further, acquiring an active competence in the language of the religious, after which the “rules of faith” of a given religion could be discovered. These processes would be developed in parallel. The Imperative of a New Contextualization The third criterion is the imperative of a new contextualization of the biblical message for the Western context. This requirement might seem to be acquired for the majority world, but this is far from the case in our respective countries. Jean-François Zorn does not understand why contextual theologies do not exist for our Western contexts as we know them for the majority world.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 114

25-09-2021 09:26:32

Contextual Characteristics

115

He proposes several original titles, such as a “theology of the marginal,” a “theology of democracy,” or a “theology of the car.”34 Why this lack of contextual theologies for the West, despite the fascination of numerous Western theologians for such theologies? Bosch supposes that we may have unconsciously believed that the Gospel has already been well contextualized in the West. But he rejects this thought, proposing that Westerners have already largely turned their back on the Gospel. For Bosch, the question remains open: either the Good News was never correctly contextualized,35 or it was hypercontextualized—that is, it lost its provocative character.36 By contrast, Büker postulates an “ex-culturation” of Christianity in Western Europe, according to which the Christian faith would no longer be very significant for our cultures.37 An aborted contextualization, an uncritical contextualization, or a non-contextualization—such are the working hypotheses diagnosing the inculturation of the Gospel in the West, which are left without response for the time being. Bosch is disarmed before the task of a new contextualization. He admits his incapability, while placing his hopes in such a missiology which he sees as a priority for his missiological work.38 Büker describes the situation of mission in Europe in the first paragraph of his article. The fourth element in his description of the context is consecrated precisely to the “lack of inculturation of the Christian faith.”39 He proposes several reasons for this deficit: (a) To start, inculturation has no need of an academic theology; the subjects of the inculturation would be the believers themselves. (b) The lack of explanation concerning contextualization, and (c) The mutism of believers in no way encourages awareness of the problem. (d) The lack of courage and creativity of the clergy, and (e) The lack of adapted theological education are other causes proposed by the author. Possible ways out of this impasse are discussed at the end of Bosch’s article, and correspond to other criteria which I will treat below. Walldorf clearly affirms the theme of contextualization in his explanations, but he sticks to general imperatives without precise application in the European context.40 The small number of investigations demonstrates that the task of a new contextualization in the West is both urgent and formidable. Either a general approach to the Western culture is adopted at the cost of insufficient precision (there are multiple Western contexts), or focus is placed on one aspect at the risk of having nothing to say to other missionary spaces.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 115

25-09-2021 09:26:32

116

Chapter 3

Inconsistencies of Modernity We will attempt to offer a critique of modernity based on Bosch and Newbigin. This will be the fourth contextual criterion of a missiology of the Western world. The era of modernity owes much to the Enlightenment. In his last article Bosch summarized the seven fundamental convictions engendered by the century of the Enlightenment (which he had developed at length in his missiological “summa”)41: (a) Human reason is the starting point of all knowledge; (b) Reality is divided into subjects and objects; (c) The search for a purpose is abandoned in favor of explaining cause or effect; (d) With the help of science, progress is possible in every domain; (e) There is a marked and fundamental difference between knowledge (which is positive and neutral) and values (which are subjective and the objects of preferences); (f) Every problem has a solution; and finally, (g) Persons are emancipated and autonomous. Bosch’s aim is not to disavow the heritage of the Enlightenment altogether. He explains what we owe them from a positive standpoint. His goal is primarily to demonstrate their influence on missionary theology and practice. Bosch insists that the Protestant Reformation overturned the Middle Ages’ Thomist harmony between faith and reason. The opposition between these two increasingly introduced the idea of incompatibility between the church and the world—the famous “protestant principle” described by Tillich. The majority of Protestant theology thus ceded to the influence of the Enlightenment, adapting religion to the cultivated class beginning in the time of Schleiermacher. But this sparked a distancing of “religion” from “the world,” culminating in a dichotomy. Religion was progressively delimited to a private sphere with no real impact on society. Theology thus applied to itself the same rules of the “scientific method” as the other disciplines liberated from the church’s tutelage. How does contemporary society relate to its Christian heritage? Bosch raises the ambiguity of rejection or ignorance of the Christian tradition on the one hand, and acceptance of some of its values on the other. Many contemporaries think that these values derive from the Enlightenment, unaware of their Judeo-Christian origins. Bosch then critiques the excessive use of elements acquired in the Enlightenment: the extreme application of rationalism sometimes led an allegedly scientific view of the world to very intolerant treatment of divergent opinions. The corollary of such scientism is a similarly

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 116

25-09-2021 09:26:32

Contextual Characteristics

117

developed relativism. This latter can even be treated dogmatically. Moderns could thus conjointly proclaim total relativism regarding “values” on the one hand, and a dogmatism for “facts” on the other. According to Bosch, there are no more universal norms. Persons do as they wish, and “proof” reigns in the sciences. Total confidence in the reliability of reason and personal experience are at the origin of dogmatic scientism and extreme relativism. The two have placed man at the center of a referential system. But as contemporary history demonstrates, this new freedom did not usher in the awaited progress.42 Newbigin employs a similar argument. He likewise begins his oeuvre with a critical examination of post-Enlightenment culture. He defines our culture as a society of people who have attained complete self-consciousness. It is no longer possible to affirm that “the Bible is the word of God” as in earlier times; this affirmation is interpreted today as a subjective opinion. Newbigin relies on a work of Peter Berger to expose his thesis of a Christian affirmation in modernity.43 Berger describes three such possibilities. (a) The deductive possibility (with Karl Barth as an archetype) witnesses to a preexisting tradition without invoking reasoned arguments. (b) The reductive position (with Rudolf Bultmann as an archetype) adopts the viewpoint of the world as an ultimate structure. (c) Berger opts for the third “inductive” position (with Friedrich Schleiermacher as an archetype). Universal human experiences are the only facts which are meaningful and observable for everyone. “Signs of transcendence” must be analyzed by reason to distinguish between true and false religiosity. According to Berger, religion can only be located within religious experiences. Newbigin agrees with Berger to a point, but criticizes Berger’s inductive method as nested within the plausibility structure of the presuppositions of the modern scientific worldview. This method is thus both real and limited primarily because it does not respond to the “why” and the purpose of the creation of the world. No inductive method can respond to these questions. Newbigin subscribes to Berger’s postulate that each Westerner lives under the constraint of the “heretical imperative,” an expression which should be taken in its etymological sense. We are all subject to an imperative choice concerning religion and ethics. The ensemble of these “choices” makes up what we call “pluralism.” But Newbigin highlights a first inconsistency of modernity: the world of values is indeed “plural,” but alongside this world there is the other world of “facts.” The representatives of this latter world allow for no pluralism, only affirmations of true or false. The strict separation between the two worlds and their opposing value systems seem suspect to Newbigin. This amounts to saying that Christianity must submit to the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 117

25-09-2021 09:26:33

118

Chapter 3

discipline of the assumptions of the scientific world, and that our society does not allow us to distance ourselves from this “orthodoxy.” Bosch sees the second inconsistency of modernity in a second separation connected to the first division already evoked: the separation of public and private spheres. The former is dominated by “facts,” the latter by personal “values.” The former is directed by scientific “proofs” and a plethora of trusted experts; the second runs on a pluralism of opinions.44 A missiology for the Western world must imperatively interrogate these two dichotomies which result from a long process of secularization. The church and theology must be liberated from voluntary or unconscious imprisonment in the private sphere, without nostalgic attachment to the former days of Christendom.45 The Gospel is a public truth. An Impossible Unbelief “We are henceforth destined to live naked and in anguish, which was more or less spared us from the beginning of the human adventure by the grace of the gods.”46 This citation comes from the last page of a major work by Marcel Gauchet describing the situation of modern man in a disenchanted world. Gauchet inverts the usual viewpoint of an evolution of “religion.” Instead, for Gauchet the pure state of religion is found at its beginning. He then follows the meandering paths of the history of Christianity and its contribution to the Western world. Christianity was a formidable catalyst for the West, but it was itself transformed, leading some of the structures of modernity. Voided of its essence, it became “the religion of the exit from religion.”47 Gauchet nevertheless allows for the possibility of religion in a so-called society “after religion.” He locates three levels which continue to structure the religious human: (a) The “religious” nourishes our thinking in subjectively organizing reality. (b) It organizes our capacity to imagine reality. This includes our aesthetic experiences, our capacity for emotion. (c) It governs the modalities of experiencing the problem which humanity is for itself. This includes questions of the being of the human being as a subject. Gauchet allows for an indestructible remainder of the phenomenon, but strictly limits it to a personal and subjective experience.48 The debate is thus between the protagonists of a disenchantment and a re-enchantment of the world. In any case, the contextual characteristics of a missiology for the Western culture must integrate the challenges facing the religious phenomenon all the more; for despite its projected disappearance,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 118

25-09-2021 09:26:33

Contextual Characteristics

119

despite the dramatic disintegration of institutional Christianity, and despite the theories of secularization, religion still manifests itself, but not where we usually place it. This challenge cannot be restricted to an analysis within the sociology of religions; in many ways, it resembles the breaking of a taboo assimilated by Western society. As in the preceding paragraph, we begin our journey with the Enlightenment. The philosophers and the ideology of the Enlightenment were at least partially driven by atheism. Religion had to give way to powerful philosophical trends. Bosch highlights that this line was pursued in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by well-known names such as Nietzsche, Freud, Hegel, Fichte, Feuerbach, and Marx. In the mid-twentieth century, many believed that the time for the disappearance of “the religious” had definitively arrived. Theologians were not inactive at this time; they developed “secular theologies” going as far as the proclamation of “the death of God.” The twentieth century was a theater for great ideologies: Marxism (a “Judeo-Christian heresy”), fascism, National Socialism, and socialism. They often drew on the Christian pool itself, distinguishing themselves from it and hoping to take its place. They claimed a scientific foundation for their ideas and located themselves in the lineage of the rigorous scientism of the Enlightenment. Despite their virulent opposition to religion, they all bore the marks of a religion. Bosch does not believe that our present era, following the collapse of these ideologies, could be called post-ideological. Rather, he speaks of “soft” ideologies, for example, the notion of a “new world order.” In any case, the historical fact is visible to all: the ideologies have not managed to supplant religion.49 Tillich had dubbed these ideologies “quasi-religions,” defining them as a movement with a totalitarian requirement, thus “like a religion.” This description applies to every attitude which claims as much importance as would be due to God. To complete this description, we must allude to the more diffuse phenomena of “pseudo-religions.” Their “adherents” invoke forces and supernatural beings, which can indeed recall a “religion.” This type of belief can mix with established religions or have its own separate life. It can also be called “superstition” or “occultism.”50 A large part of Western populations practice such beliefs, incidentally, without concern for the conflict engendered with the values of their “scientific” education or their apparent ideological poverty. The erosion of mainline Christianity in the West has not given way to a “religious” void. Ideologies, other quasi-religions, or pseudo-religions have picked up the slack. The displacement of populations on a global scale in the last two centuries has seen the advent of adherents of other religions into Western latitudes. At least for some, these persons practice their religion. These non-Christian “spiritualities” intrigue Westerners, though they do not seem to arouse a pronounced passion. Exoticism can attract or repel. The

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 119

25-09-2021 09:26:34

120

Chapter 3

human of late modernity only adopts these practices partially and selectively. Some talk here of “religious bricolage.”51 Christian spirituality, too, has seen new phenomena. Bosch relates the general surprise evoked by the birth of the charismatic movement, which has not only affected a layer of workingclass society on the margins of “established” churches, but even intellectuals within these churches.52 This movement was preceded by the foundation of Pentecostal churches at the beginning of the twentieth century, with its contribution of “emotional” spirituality. Various Pentecostal movements and charismatic movements are currently the fastest growing Christian movements globally. This is a surprise even for “historical” evangelical Western churches, who should be better able to understand the “spiritual” structure of these movements.53 Within the sociology of religions, we note a slippage of meaning in the definition of “religion” and in the theorization of secularization. The definition of “religion” and “religious” phenomena determines the analysis of the religious fact. Today this definition is oriented around two poles: a restrictive and substantive explanation which examines practices, or an extensive definition which analyzes the whole universe of meanings. The former dominated the landscape of sociology of religions until the 1960s. It was theorized within the paradigm of secularization.54 The conclusions from these studies speak in terms of “losses” of the religious fact. The protagonists of the second definition subsequently observe a re-composition and redeployment of this fact in Western societies. Some even cast doubt on the secularization paradigm. Sociologists of religion today make the following dual observation: on the one hand, the crumbling of practices in state churches accelerated by the individualization of believing and general de-institutionalization; on the other hand, a growth in diffuse beliefs noted in surveys from the last twenty years.55 These are “the two faces of religion,” a notion developed by Roland Campiche for the Swiss context.56 Today we are thus far from the prediction of moderns who had announced the end of “religion”; the loss of the “religious” only corresponds to part of the phenomenon, not its totality. The notion of religion is unsurpassable, even in the Western context which had been promised a future without religion. A contextual missiology for this part of the world, therefore, must necessarily work toward a theology of religions encompassing not only a preparation for encounters with the “great religions,” but also for a discovery of this “new face” of the religious. Secondarily, it ought to flush out the new (and probably also the old) idolatries of modern times. Thirdly, it will affirm the requirement of the first commandment57 of the decalogue in the sense of the prologue of the same fundamental text: liberation by God from slavery of all kinds, including religious slavery.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 120

25-09-2021 09:26:34

Contextual Characteristics

121

Christians from the South in the West The face of global Christianity at the end of the second millennium has radically changed. Europe is no longer the de facto center of Christianity; this designation now belongs in the southern hemisphere. The figures speak plainly: in 1900, 71% of all Christians in the world lived in Europe; in 1997, this number had dropped to only 29%!58 The Western church must integrate this new element as a characteristic of a contextual missiology. It will probably imply a painful and humiliating process of learning for Western Christians. Christians of the majority world no longer remain at home; they come to the West, whether in migratory flux or with missionary motivations. Newbigin highlights that we need all the “saints” to understand the grandeur of Christ (Eph 3:14ff).59 This grandeur will not have attained the promise of the prayer of the apostle Paul as long as the totality of Christians from all the cultures of the world do not participate in this theological quest for the fullness of God. Salvation in Jesus Christ has a universal bearing (1 Tim 2:4). It is the foundation of the missionary mandate which the Lord, who has now ascended to his heavenly Father, confided to his disciples (Matt. 28:16–20). The apostles, constrained by the “centrifugal” force of the Holy Spirit, traversed different cultural and religious barriers to announce the Good News beyond the synagogue in pagan lands. Paul was certainly the model of this missionary universalism (Acts 15). Consequently, the presence of Christians speaking another language should come as no surprise. The globalization of Christianity allows for the realization of mission understood as a two-way street, with mutual exchange and assistance as a common task. The presence of Christians coming from the majority world is particularly productive today for two reasons: (a) The number of missionaries from the majority world is constantly growing. This evolution has been observed since the 1970s. Though questions of statistical viability and the definition of what counts as a “missionary” obviously mean that the numbers ought to be treated cautiously, there is little doubt that in a near-future, missionaries coming from these countries will be the majority.60 Some of these missionaries choose the West as a “mission field” and their sending churches support them.61 (b) The creation of numerous “ethnic” churches62 (whose members originate from the majority world) in largely “secularized” countries such as France generates tensions with long-established churches. The difference of “spiritual” culture between these two types of churches is considerable, to say nothing of the general lack of understanding of the host culture.63

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 121

25-09-2021 09:26:34

122

Chapter 3

These Christians, having brought another Christian tradition in their suitcases, help Westerners to see their own culture critically. Newbigin hopes that through their testimony, we will be more able to see our own history and culture from another angle.64 Foreign cultures in general, as well as the specific theological contribution of these Christians, enrich our understanding of Christ and make Westerners more vigilant toward their own “syncretisms” and compromises regarding the Christian faith. But this apprenticeship is only possible insofar as Western Christians are ready to humble themselves in intense work on their own history of missions, by accepting the criticisms of Western culture expressed by Christians from the southern hemisphere, by admitting our spiritual poverty, and by accepting help in the task of a “new” evangelization of the West. OTHER CONTEXTUAL CHARACTERISTICS The following characteristics are developed based on new scientific disciplinary perspectives (practical theology, history, demography and geography, philosophy). We add them as a complement to the analyses of the sociology of religions (chapter 2) and the points named by the three missiologists. This section is not an exhaustive treatment of the subject. First, we must briefly illuminate the fundamental characteristics of modernity. Hervieu-Léger proposes three: (1) The importance of rationality, which engenders a constant adaptation of the means to the ends pursued. All irrational thought should be set aside. Science and technique are put at the service of the progress of society. (2) The second characteristic concerns the relation of humans to the world. The human being affirms himself or herself as an autonomous subject, capable of acting by his or her own means. He or she gives her own meaning to their existence, placing oneself at the center of history. He or she is no longer “dominated” by the traditions of societies of yesteryear. He or she is “master of their destiny.” (3) The third characteristic is a consequence of the first. Hervieu-Léger speaks of the differentiation among multiple domains of social activity. This differentiation creates separations between public space and the private sphere, between politics and the religious, between the economy and personal life. Each of these domains (e.g., science, religion, art) obey their own rules. On the one hand, these three aspects of modernity have considerably transformed Western societies. But on the other, they have also catalyzed the process of secularization.65

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 122

25-09-2021 09:26:35

Contextual Characteristics

123

Transcendence in Sociology of Religions We now turn to a critical analysis of the methodology of sociology of religions to counterbalance the weight of the affirmations in chapter 2. The sociology of religions proposes its interpretations of the religious fact. But it ought to be supplemented with other historical, philosophical, and theological approaches. Before digging into our subject, we must first succinctly sketch the principal theories in the sociology of religions. Our treatment follows the non-exhaustive survey of Enzo Pace, who introduces us to the current state of this discipline.66 (1) The theory of Rational Choice supposes that actors act through rational choice in weighing the costs and benefits, thus opting for conduct which provides the lowest costs and greatest benefits. Transposed into the religious domain, this theory infers that choices in religious matters are just as rational as in other social spheres. “Religious” phenomena are transformed into goods which circulate on a religious market. The attention of this model inspired by economics moves from demand to supply: which actions will be undertaken by a religion to satisfy their current and potential adherents? The various offers thus make up the “religious market.” Religious “entrepreneurs” are obliged to multiply their efforts to offer religious symbols equally or more attractive than those of the “competition.” The more this market is “free,” the more choices “religious clients” have. According to this logic, the “market” ought to be maximally deregulated to liberate “religious supply.” The monopolization of the market by a religion hampers or eliminates religious pluralism. For the advocates of this theory, there is no process of secularization at all, only a continual change in the “religious.” (2) A second macro-theory which embraces all aspects of life is the theory of social systems.67A first presupposition of this theory is found in the notion of complexity. It signifies the impossibility of determining the essence of an object, because our observation is always linked to the distinction between the object itself and its background. When we refer to an object (indication), we simultaneously distinguish it from its context (distinction). It follows that this complexity prevents us from including all the elements of a system at a given moment. This first presupposition rests on a second: our observations do not reflect reality, but only the perspective of the observer. If we take sight as an example of the explanation of the theories of systems, we affirm that the eye only sees its immediate environment. The eye would thus represent this system, closed by definition, which can only perceive what its “eye” permits it to see in its context. Sociologist Niklas Luhmann, one of the foremost

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 123

25-09-2021 09:26:35

124

Chapter 3

representatives of this theory, has applied the theory of social systems to religion. He postulates that secularization not only concerns the religious field, but society as a whole. This process leads society to subdivide itself. Each segment uses its own symbolic code; the social system thus loses its common center. Religion can no longer play its role of integration as in premodern societies. Still, Luhmann does not predict the disappearance of religion, but its regionalization in the autonomous segment of religion. Religion remains a determining factor for the totality of the system according to the degree of differentiation of a given society. Through their functional specialization, religious organizations can once again exercise a social function. In the most differentiated societies, “religion” can more easily become a partial strategy of the social system as a whole, while in a less differentiated society, “religiosity” cannot develop. (3) According to the presupposition of constructivist theories, society is the result of mutual relations between persons, between actions and reactions, between definitions of meanings and symbols of daily life.68 Some persons share common perspectives, a fact which generates a foundation for the construction of intersubjectivity and enables the construction of a framework for mutual understanding. Reciprocal perspectives allow, first, for the emergence of a common worldview, and second, for the construction of a shared life. The meaning that individuals give to their daily life and the behavior which results from these perspectives are the object of the constructivist approach to the sociology of religion. In this perspective, “religion” is an ensemble of meanings by which persons manage their daily lives. Human agents construct orientations and dispositions of action in concrete situations. They create a common subjective point of view of which religion constitutes only one part. Properly speaking, this part is the place of transcendence, by which daily experiences are transcended to maintain the social order of the world. (4) Finally, Pace presents the approach of Danièle Hervieu-Léger, her ideas of the believing lineage and of religion as memory.69 The French sociologist of religions goes beyond the paradigm of secularization, studying religions as paths of beliefs, without establishing its content in advance at all. Through this “de-substantiated” approach, all beliefs could be structured as a religious system. Belief thus becomes the object of the sociology of religions, on the condition that this “faith” is legitimated by the authority of a tradition. The believing lineage is established through a sort of spiritual filiation between the contemporary believer and the invocation of a tradition acting as an authority. The believing person emerges from this believing lineage and develops a strong feeling of belonging. The underlying presupposition of this theoretical edifice

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 124

25-09-2021 09:26:35

Contextual Characteristics

125

considers religion as functionally equivalent to the continuity of a tradition legitimated by an authority. It should be noted that Pace’s presentation says nothing about some well-known classical approaches which continue to inform the sociology of religions. One of the most vigorous charges against the principal theories in the sociology of religions was raised in recent years by Shmuel Trigano.70 According to Trigano’s surprising observation, sociology’s secular project of explaining religious phenomena evacuates the notion of transcendence inherent in religions. But paradoxically, this attempt at explanation reintroduces a principle of transcendence, grounding analyses which are nonetheless situated within immanence. In his work, Trigano presents the principal theories of Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Karl Marx, and Pierre Bourdieu, bringing this systematic ambivalence to light. First, religion is defined by its relation to a transcendent reality, not a social reality. By contrast, sociology claims to examine this reality through a secular approach. Trigano thinks that the sociological project has not surmounted this antinomy; on the contrary, it bypasses its object of study. He demonstrates how each of the four schools is founded (in spite of itself) on an heuristic myth, an original experience which places it outside of rationality: for Durkheim, this is the corrobori71 or community; for Weber, it is the human need for symbolic order which leads to the rationalization of the world; for Marx it is the camera obscura72; and for Bordieu, “misrecognition” founds the system of domination. Trigano’s analysis flushes out sociology’s infidelity to its own logic, which sees religion as a constructed social edifice responding to needs of human groups, which exercises a constitutive or ideological function. Trigano concludes: “The immanentization of religion presupposes that we have mastered the ‘primitive scene’, the origin, thus repatriated from heaven to earth. But heaven is reconstituted on earth.”73 For Trigano, sociologists have continued to work within a logic of transcendence within the scientific process itself. They have thus created new religiosities (e.g., Durkheim’s republicanism, Marx’s communism, Comte’s religion of the Great Being). Trigano’s judgment goes further still: he asserts that we do not possess a satisfying sociological explanation of religion today. An explanation of religion from a secular perspective can go no further than an analysis of its forms, its causality, or its utility. According to him, all that will remain is the reduction of religion to politics which simultaneously destroys the distinction between the two spaces, giving birth to “political religions” (civil religion), a concept developed since 1967. As for the famous “return of the religious,” a phenomenon observed for the last thirty years, it too cannot be explained within the theoretical framework of a civil religion. Trigano’s circle of arguments thus closes. His last sentence is fatal: the theory

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 125

25-09-2021 09:26:35

126

Chapter 3

of secularization, while partly true, has clearly demonstrated its limits. “There has been no leaving religiosity for secularization, nor any return of religion to a place from which it would have been absent. Instead, there has been a sort of interpretation of religiosity by religion.”74 Alain Caillé critiques Trigano for portraying a too-radical transcendence.75 Hervieu-Léger maintains the reductionist imperative of sociology of religions all while admitting that this discipline cannot treat its object exhaustively. She maintains her “de-substantiated” non-definition of religion which allows her to apprehend religious phenomena with great flexibility, without the pitfalls of the theory of secularization. She reproaches Trigano’s absence of a viable proposal for an empirical sociological program. For Hervieu-Léger, the gift cycle (a theory of Marcel Mauss) dear to Trigano also cannot account for its own origin (the “religious moment”).76 Despite the critiques leveled against Trigano’s position, his remarks raise the question of “an immanentist approach to religion which does away with recourse to a substantial or formal transcendence.”77 While awaiting the emergence of a new theory, even in the sociology of religions, we cannot exclude recourse to an anthropological or philosophical substantial definition of religion, or even a philosophical or theological notion of transcendence. As long as the sociology of religions does not manage to exclude clusters of “transcendence” in its own production, it is completely legitimate that it should also take a theological transcendence into account in the construction of its own theoretical edifices. Otherwise it opens itself to the critique of succumbing to the ideology of modern consciousness which predicted the disappearance of religion.78 To “believe” in such a presupposition ought to lead to the tolerance which allows for another theological “ideology” alongside it, which has not ceased to repeat its own transcendent a priori for 2,000 years. Social Reality in the Sociology of Religions As we saw in the preceding section, the sociology of religions has unwittingly introduced a transcendent notion into its theoretical edifice. Through its reductionism, it has redoubled social reality into a manifest reality (e.g., the religious experience) and a primary reality (e.g., this same experience only serves to legitimate the place of the person in a group).79 The primary reality is situated “behind” the manifest reality in a “hidden” way. The work of the sociologist consists in unveiling the primary reality. A de-realization of the perception of the world is thus inevitable, and persons are dispossessed of their discourses and relations with the world. This is the thesis of philosopher Jacques Dewitte, who takes up anew the functional tradition of the sociology of religions. He interrogates it via privileged witnesses: Hannah Arendt, Hans Jonas, and Leszek Kolakowski.80

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 126

25-09-2021 09:26:36

Contextual Characteristics

127

(1) The sociology of religion has abandoned the question of a thing’s essence in favor of its function. Interest has turned away from the question “what is it?” focusing almost exclusively on the functions of the “religious fact.” Dewitte notes that at the beginning of the 1950s, Hannah Arendt opposed the idea that Nazism and communism were “secular religions” because they fulfilled the same function as Christianity, for example. Arendt cast doubt on the premise of functional sociology: each thing has a function and the search for its substance must go by way of its function. For religions, this signifies that the same “religious” function discovered in diverse phenomena defines what is “religion” and “religious.” Arendt disagrees with this de-substantialization which thumbs its nose at the borders separating different notions. She critiques not only the humanities, but the “functionalization of society” in general. The human becomes a function of society, which changes into an absolute reality because it is an ultimate reality (Dewitte talks of a new ontology or metaphysic). The priority of function over the essence of things ultimately ends in a disconnection of human experiences from reality. Such a methodological priority rejects human religious testimony. These “sources” are not taken into consideration by the social sciences. In this way people are divested of their own experiences. Other persons (specialists) have taken their place and speak in their stead. “Source” is an Arendtian notion primarily encompassing subjective interpretation of human experiences. But it also signifies the aspect of every discourse which targets a privileged object: for religion, this is whatever is divine or God; for communism, the laws of history play this role. This object must be accounted for, first, in order to understand the phenomenon, and second for its typological classification. According to Arendt, the constitutive relation to the object is neglected by functional sociology. But every honest scientific procedure must account for precisely this strong bond which allows for a distinction of different discourses. Dewitte transcribes this thought of Arendt onto the notion of the object. According to him, the diversity of objects must be respected (ideology, science, or religion for example) without fitting them into a common mold. Then, the intentional aim of each of these objects must be established. This aim is constitutive of the nature of the object, and thus substantial. To neglect the object of discourse out of principle comes down to breaking its backbone. In this scenario, “Religion” can be similarly situated by functional sociology within any other “functioning” phenomenon, on the condition that it cuts off specific relations with its object. After this scission, it can be linked to other similar functional substitutes and be gathered into a functional network called “Society” (with a capital “S”). The Arendtian project is opposed to this new

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 127

25-09-2021 09:26:36

128

Chapter 3

“transcendence” (to pick up the notion from the last section), this new “reality” which plays an increasingly important role in her time. Arendt fought against a “world loss,” insisting on conceptual distinctions. Before defining a “thing,” one must go as far as possible in its distinction, implying that its nature is structured and consistent prior to its definition. For Arendt, this pre-existence of distinction and differentiation of an object in the real must be recognized. (2) Dewitte extends Arendt’s idea of “intentional aim” with a similar notion, “intrinsic ends” (innewohnende Zwecke), from Hans Jonas.81 Jonas illustrates his concept through several examples. The hammer was created for hammering; this is its intrinsic goal. But we can also use it to pick leaves off the ground. This corresponds to an extrinsic usage. Jonas highlights that we cannot put these “momentary ends” on the same level as the intrinsic end. Religion sometimes plays an extrinsic role, but we cannot confuse this marginal role with the normal use of its intrinsic end. An outside observation of participants in a religious meeting (a Sunday worship service, for example) does not yet allow one to understand the phenomenon of a “worship service.” One must listen to the words spoken to understand that what is happening can be described as “religion.” One must listen even longer to decode several foundational concepts such as “God” or “salvation.” Only at the end of this process can one distinguish this service from another gathering. The goal of this service is not automatically given in outer manifestations; these observations must be combined with the words and gestures of the participants. This requires an attitude of good faith, but without necessarily implying the least value judgment, nor even a true act of faith from the observer. I can thus manage to understand “the aim for which” this ceremony unfolds, or more generally, “the aim for which” this religion was socially and historically instituted.82 Jonas seeks to prioritize “intrinsic ends,” to not confuse them with temporary ends of a thing or group. Intrinsic purpose should not be systematically subordinated to the search for functional purpose. (3) Dewitte is aware that the object of religion eludes apprehension in a purely objective manner. Access to this object necessarily passes through religious language, but also through the institution, theological system, and rite. These phenomena are situated in a circular logic which Dewitte’s third privileged witness, Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski, develops in his approach to religion.83 Kolakowski seeks to circumscribe religion from within itself. His phenomenological process could be qualified as

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 128

25-09-2021 09:26:36

Contextual Characteristics

129

anti-reductionist and anti-functionalist. He seeks to respect the specific mode in which religion allows itself to be known. Kolakowski begins with the principle that an “instrumental theory of the sacred” cannot accomplish its own goal. The sociological explanation of religion always stumbles over the anteriority of the sacred. He thus defines religion as an “originary phenomenon” which must be understood beginning with itself. Kolakowski does not deny that religion can serve various interests, but a function of religion presupposes a preexisting reservoir of the meaning of religion. The functional usage draws its energy from the existing non-functional and primary dimension of religion. The philosopher also holds to his anti-reductionist position concerning religious language. He exposes reductionism as “a linguistic operation of translation”: religious experience is translated into another language which is presumed to be reasonable. This operation implies a shift in ontological foundation: the existence of an ultimate reality behind religious language is presupposed. Kolakowski rejects this premise because it suggests that believers are not saying what they mean. Functionalist sociologists thus reveal their true “faith” in “society.” Kolakowski proposes another methodological mode. Instead of seeking to unmask or demystify religious language, he proposes a “flat presupposition:” believers actually mean to say what they explicitly affirm. Kolakowski proceeds to a reversal of functional reductionism: what demystifying interpretation had turned in the opposite direction, he returns to its original position. The philosopher thus puts himself in an awkward situation regarding a scientific method which usurps the right to strip believers of the content of their faith and put another “religious” discourse in its place. We suspect that his definition of religion84 comes closer to a substantial explanation than to a functional one, though it is not essence, but the relation to “an eternal reality” which he places at the center. The Kolakowskian paradox is thus sketched: some things can only be defined beginning with themselves, in accounting for their link to something else. The phenomenological notion of intentionality (from Husserl) shows itself clearly in this definition. The link between “worship” and “eternal reality” thus enters into the framework of Husserl’s intentionality. Religion’s object is distinct from the psychic state of the believer. According to Dewitte, the sociologist should accept this reality put forth by believers, a reality separate from the sentiment and life of the believer, instead of refusing it. Intentionality does not move unidirectionally from consciousness toward the object but goes in the opposite direction as well. If consciousness really possesses this aptitude to recognize “something,” by its essence this “something” also intentionally targets consciousness. Intentionality is thus bidirectional. Dewitte illustrates this fact via language.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 129

25-09-2021 09:26:37

130

Chapter 3

Discourse is an intentional relation corresponding to a transitive relation. The goal of discourse, its object, in turn calls on the word. A supposedly intransitive language remains empty, without a referent. The bidirectional intentional relation brings out a certain circularity between consciousness and object. By virtue of this circularity, neither of the two poles can assert itself as primary. The question of access to this circularity is thus posed. This access happens through religious language because religious experience never exists in raw form. This experience must necessarily pass through the mediation of language. Language and experience, properly speaking, form an indissociable whole. To give a meaning to one’s religious experience with language allows for its inscription in history. The historicity of religious forms in turn cannot be separated from its “object.” And this “object” only allows itself to be grasped in the form of religious language. This circularity cannot be interrupted according to Dewitte; it must be accepted. Based on this observation, he demands respect for the religious phenomenon’s own mode of presenting itself: It involves respecting the way in which religious experience gives itself and speaks itself and to consider that language which it speaks to speak itself, and which it has given itself over the centuries, constitutes a privileged mode of access to reality (to the object) to which it constitutively relates, and without which it could not apprehend it.85

Dewitte goes even further than Trigano in his critique of the sociology of religions. He prefers the term “reality” to the notion of “transcendence.” In any event, functional sociology introduces a new reality which seems to be more adapted to true human reality than that described by believers. This “new reality” of functional sociology is unmasked by Dewitte as a new ontology (“Society”). Functional methodology pays a heavy tribute because it turns away from sources and the essence of things; worse still, it strips believers of their religious discourses and contributes to a separation from the reality of the word. The stated goal of sociology of religions—to show reality as it is—is not attained. The functionalization of humanity bears grave consequences for our anthropological conception. The danger of instrumentalizing humanity is not far off. How can one claim to not take seriously the testimony of billions of persons? How can one not be sensitive to the argument for the pre-existence of “religion,” when survey data from the most secularized countries shows that even “non-religious” persons refer to religion in their negation? Those conducting such surveys, incidentally, experience great difficulty in developing “neutral” questions which do not refer to religion. A missiology for the Western context must take account of these arguments to avoid working exclusively with functional definitions of religion.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 130

25-09-2021 09:26:37

Contextual Characteristics

131

Persons “Without Religion” and Alternative Beliefs We have already evoked the phenomena of persons “without religion” and alternative beliefs, particularly visible in France and the New States in Germany. This observation was relayed in part by missiological literature. But here we must perform a more precise analysis to better understand the problematic. Persons “Without Religion” We begin our remarks with a presentation of statistics concerning Europe. 13% of the population of nine Western European countries declared no religious belonging in 1981 (according to the European Values Study [EVS]).86 This rate rose to 25% in 1999. In 1990, 38% of French citizens, 42% of UK citizens, and 49% of Dutch citizens belonged to this category. In 1999, the figures climbed further in the French (43%) and British (54%) cases.87 An analysis conducted by Miklos Tomka compares Eastern and Western European Countries with reference to two groups: persons who are not church members (“non-members”) and those who describe themselves as non-religious (persons “without religion”).88 His work is based on the 1990 and 1999 EVS surveys and the 1995 WVS survey in twenty-eight countries. Here is our synthesis of the first part of his study. The two groups are quite sizable in most European countries. The percentage rates of the two groups are often comparable within a given country. But the differences in practice and religious declaration are noteworthy from one country to another. The percentage of those not affiliated with a church is generally lower than the rate of those “without religion” in the West (with the Netherlands as an exception). In the East, this relationship is inverted. The number of “non-members” is growing in most Western countries. In the East of the continent, both growth and diminishing numbers of “non-members” can be observed. A similar trend for Eastern Europe is found among those “without religion.” In greater detail, eight out of thirteen Western European countries record a rise in the number of persons in this category, while eleven out of fifteen Eastern countries record a drop in this figure. Three recognizable identities form among the two groups analyzed: an areligious identity among “non-members,” an areligious identity among church members, and a religious self-definition among “nonmembers.” For the first identity, France and the Netherlands are at the top of the list among Western countries (34% of the adult population, excluding all church affiliation and religiosity); Eastern Germany (59%) and Czechia (48%) come in first among eastern countries. Tomka highlights the general difference between the two parts of Europe: religion has become a cultural custom in the West, but the loss of “faith” does not imply disaffiliation. The contrary (faith without affiliation) is more present in the eastern part of the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 131

25-09-2021 09:26:38

132

Chapter 3

continent, and also in Belgium and the Netherlands. The majority of “nonreligious” persons in the East reject “religion,” but also religious belonging. According to Tomka, the “conviction” of churches in the West is more “vigorous” than personal religious practice. Again, the opposite phenomenon is discernable in the East. In the second part of his study, Tomka presents the results of a factorial analysis, leading him to develop four ideal-typical groups (persons attached to the church, to rituals, to expectations of life after death, and to esoterism), which are added to the three kinds of religiosity described above. Of course, correspondences between the three kinds of religiosity which describe the distance from religion (a subjective definition given by those surveyed) and the four ideal-typical groups (objective positions observed by researchers) vary. We cannot describe the results of this correlational analysis in detail. Tomka notes a relative uniformity observed among “non-religious” and “nonmember” persons in the eleven chosen European countries: there is a lack of attachment to the church, and the expectation of life after death is very low. Instead, this demand is somewhat stronger concerning rituals and esoteric practices. The variation of positions among the countries is more marked in the two groups of “non-members” with religious identification and areligious church members. In any case, “belief” or “faith” never completely disappears. We observe the persistence of some belief among these three groups of persons, which nevertheless marks the greater distance from religious thought and religious organizations.89 We will now further specify these general remarks concerning the European countries through the example of French persons “without religion.” Yves Lambert has analyzed this group based on EVS studies. France has one of the highest rates of this population in Europe. After twenty years of observation (1981–1990–1999), he notes stability of beliefs among practicing Catholics, growth among non-practicing Catholics (which is even greater among “non-atheist persons without religion”), and even growth among “convinced atheists without religion.” In 1981, 18% of “non-atheist persons without religion” believed in the existence of life after death. This rate rose to 31% in 1999. Positive affirmations in reply to this question among “convinced atheists without religion” rose from 1% to 14% between the two survey dates. If we focus on youths in each surveyed group, the phenomenon is even more amplified. Positive responses among the first group have gone from 26% to 39%, and among the second group from 3% to 27%. Adherence to beliefs has generally grown for all beliefs taken together among those “without religion.” Here are the rates for 1981 and 1999, respectively, for various beliefs: from 14% to 23% for belief in God; from 21% to 26% for “a kind of spirit or life force”; from 12% to 26% for “life after death”; from 5% to 12% for a heaven; from 3% to 7% for hell; from 9% to 15% for sin; and

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 132

25-09-2021 09:26:38

Contextual Characteristics

133

from 20% to 23% for reincarnation. The surprise was that in 1999, 10% of young “convinced atheists” (eighteen to twenty-nine years old) believed in God. This rate was 0% in 1981.90 All these analyses of those “without religion” raise the terminological difficulties regarding the choice of label, their classification in a “religious” research framework all the same (indeed, these persons declare themselves to have no “religious” reference), and the real content of this non-belief. Upon closer examination, despite their self-definition, some of these persons maintain beliefs, whether consciously or unconsciously. A simple glance at the classifications of this type given by sociologists of religions91 makes clear that the content of their affirmations is not completely free of religious connotation. “Decidedly, those without religion are not what they used to be,”92 observes Lambert—a description which might be equally applied to atheists, but also to Christians. Atheists and those “without religion” are more open to belief, while Christians subscribe less and less to the doctrines of their churches, maintaining their “faith” alongside their beliefs. In 1981, the ideological frontiers between the various groups of persons were more impermeable. Since the 1990s, the disconnect of beliefs from faith in God has been confirmed, and ideological limits of groups have lost their impermeability. We are indeed faced with increasingly fluctuating beliefs, “broken up” and individualized. The group of those “without religion” has grown notably in Western Europe, but it can also diminish. To declare oneself “without religion” does not mean the absence of beliefs; on the contrary, the French example even shows growth among these latter. Eastern Germany, Estonia, and Czechia are high on the European scale of those “without religion.” In these countries, communism carried its anti-Christian political agenda to its culmination. In Eastern Germany, few new beliefs have replaced Christians’ faith in God. The two latter countries are home to the highest numbers of atheists and the weakest numbers of “religious” persons.93 The group of those “without religion” in Europe ought to be apprehended with great prudence concerning its self-definition, since its empirical reality unveils a certain paradoxical “religiosity” more or less pronounced in each country and region. This group will most probably continue to grow, but its growth does not necessarily signify an absolute imposition of non-religious culture in Europe. Alternative Beliefs The second phenomenon, alternative beliefs, equally merits the attention of researchers into the religious state of Europe. We will again dwell on France as an example. Françoise Champion created the notion of “mystic-esoteric nebula” to better grasp the proliferation of beliefs such as clairvoyance,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 133

25-09-2021 09:26:39

134

Chapter 3

astrology, alternative medicine, reincarnation, near-death experiences, or even esoterism. This definition is purposely hazy in order to highlight one of its principal characteristics. These beliefs are often developed on the margin of an established primary reference (whether religious, scientific, or other). Champion situates the genesis of this nebula at the beginning of the 1970s, during the era of a movement opposing Western culture. Omnipresent modern rationality was put in question by this countercultural movement, which led to a profound mutation of mentalities toward an increasingly pronounced individualism. Champion lists three conditions which facilitated the emergence of these beliefs: (1) Massive dechristianization since the 1960s entailed a complete loss of interest from the younger generations in churches. As the chain of intergenerational transmission had definitively broken, religious institutions had no more traction with individual persons. This deinstitutionalization would go on to benefit atheism, agnosticism, and rationalism. The decomposition of the church favored this form of belief in the marvelous, the magical, and the mysterious. (2) Science, an uncontestable beneficiary of interrogations of “religious obscurantism,” was itself destabilized in the 1970s. Its formidable advances pushed the boundaries of the impossible further and further, but they could not defend themselves against the uncertainties of postmodern society. At this moment, other “sciences” or “truths” thus invite themselves to take their place alongside the “established” sciences. These new modes of explaining the world can live very well alongside a dominant scientific worldview (Weltanschauung). (3) Contemporary Individualism is the third “facilitator” which contributes to the expansion of this nebula. The individual person counts only on her individual experience to compose her “spirituality” from the symbolic goods available to her. The “insecurity” produced by this accrued subjectivity nevertheless seeks exterior validations to overcome this feeling. Many times, these validations have not been subjected to criticism, but the person privileges a hazy pluralism of references which ultimately do not support any clear responses and position. The “adherent” consciously cultivates this ambiguity.94 The French are interested in para-science. Studies since 1982 demonstrate the stable or growing attraction to this this type of “religiosity,” notably among women and youths.95 Higher education does not exclude adherence to these beliefs. Guy Michelat writes that 81% of French citizens think that the development of science entails progress. But 51% of the same French citizens

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 134

25-09-2021 09:26:39

Contextual Characteristics

135

also say that science will never manage to explain all phenomena. This difficult cohabitation from a rational point of view expresses the position of this kind of belief. “On the one hand, there is a desire to legitimate the supernatural via science, and on the other hand, to cultivate the charm and mystery of alternative beliefs.”96 The retreat of the Roman Catholic church goes hand in hand with growth of alternative beliefs. But properly religious beliefs do not exclude synthesis with para-science. Michelat, like Champion before him, highlights that these beliefs are not the fruit of some pre-critical reference, but spring precisely from modernity. They disseminate the ideology of progress, which claims a rational verification which cannot be furnished by the sciences; individuals, therefore, seek this verification in the irrational. In his 2002 article, Daniel Boy adds the middle classes and non-practitioners to the groups particularly sensitive to supernatural phenomena stipulated by Michelat. Boy observes that alternative beliefs develop particularly in A sort of in-between of religious belief: a regular religious practice as an anchor in irreligiosity (declaring oneself “without religion”) diverts beliefs away from the para-sciences. Inversely, those who situate themselves in more ambiguous positions (occasional practitioners) or who practice “other religions” more often declare their belief in paranormal phenomena.97

At the end of his study, Boy affirms society’s tolerance of a degree of this irrational belief. Throughout his survey, he encountered very few people who accepted no form of alternative belief. Upon closer examination, we observe that if we abandon a restrictive definition of religion, modernity is a point of origin not only for the decline of Christianity, but it can just as well generate religiosity.98 Observing the two phenomena analyzed in this section which encompass the non-religious (those “without religion”) and non-believing (paranormal beliefs) sphere catapults us toward an extensive definition of religion. It is true that even in a fully secularized and individualized society with a high rate of persons declaring themselves “without religion,” we discover in surveys that these persons still bathe in a great nebula of beliefs. Those who really assume a confessed, felt, and applied non-religiosity are few. Whether these two phenomena have persisted for ages or belong to the work of modernity, they demonstrate that “religious” and diffuse beliefs exist in a societal underground and can blend very well into a modern secularized society which “believes” itself to be liberated from all religiosity. The primacy of reason postulated since the Enlightenment is in the process of exhausting itself in an ultramodern society where rationality and irrationality are no longer lived as a contradiction, but as two complementary notions. Scientism has not kept its promises of endless progress, and must allow itself to be completed against its

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 135

25-09-2021 09:26:39

136

Chapter 3

will by pseudo-sciences. Europe, then, is in no way liberated from all religiosity. On the contrary, if we follow Champion’s model of a mystical-esoteric nebula, we are faced with a proliferation of beliefs and we can perceive the “religious” (almost) everywhere. However, this “religious” is not perceived and attributed as such by those concerned. A missiology for the European/ Western context must take account of these two described phenomena which perhaps surpass even the impact of the religiosity of adherents to “official” religions. An “Empirical Theology” For the first three sections, we have followed the methods of sociology of religions. We developed a fundamental critique in the first two sections: the introduction of a notion of transcendence and a “new reality” into the very heart of this sociology’s scientific project, which leads to a certain draining of the reality of the world and a dispossession of believers. We then turned our attention to two particular phenomena of contemporary belief in the third section. These manifestations will require greater attention from researchers. This fourth section serves as a bridge between the empirical sciences and practical theology: we study various aspects of a new approach which attempts to join theology and the social sciences, which we call “empirical theology.” Different schools in Germany, the United States, and the Netherlands claim this designation. Empiricism and Theology Only over the course of the last century did empirical research establish itself within theology as an autonomous field. Certainly, there is a long tradition in theology of analytical work through reason. But empiricism (the heart of the natural sciences) has long been designated as an adversary of faith. Protestantism in particular wanted nothing to do with such “natural” empirical knowledge, insisting on the specificity of its own scientific method. Empirical theology generally integrates the results of research in the empirical sciences into theological reflection in an interdisciplinary dialogue (in which philosophy, the empirical social sciences, systematic theology, and practical theology all participate). More precisely, it is a model of theological research which constructs the knowledge of “lived religion” based on analysis of experiences through proven methods.99 Experience became a methodical principal of theology in the contemporary period because theology felt accused of a lack of attachment to reality. This loss was even more palpable in the practice of the Christian faith. This crisis certainly contributed to the emergence of empirical theology. Infatuation

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 136

25-09-2021 09:26:40

Contextual Characteristics

137

with the social sciences in the 1970s led practical theologians to quickly integrate them in their systems as catalysts of their theory of action. These sciences could easily find their place in a given scientific construction with the goal of rendering church action more effective. Dominant trends in practical theology have since changed, and empirical theology has left its place of origin as a science of action, instead settling in as a science of perception. Four Schools of “Empirical Theology” The presentation of four schools of empirical theology retraces its historical path and illuminates the diversity of current expressions. We follow Meyer’s presentation. (a) The empirical “turn” in the 1970s marked the entry of the social sciences into theology. Several decades earlier, continental theology either ignored or still fought against these disciplines. One pioneer of such an approach, Werner Gruehn (1887–1961), already called for “religious experiments” as early as 1930. Such research intended to boost understanding of the contemporary religious world to improve Christian practice. Gruehn’s empirical studies in religious psychology led to concrete applications in religious pedagogy and counseling. A relation of practical application between empiricism and theology ensued, despite the significant distance maintained between the two domains. This functional application of the social sciences in theology retains its pertinence in many working models of practical theology today. (b) The Chicago School, the American school of empirical theology, does not adhere to this separation between theology and experience. It grounds the development of its theologies in immediate and universal access to common experience. These experiences guarantee increased evidence which validates these studies. This type of empirical theology works with philosophical and epistemological premises. Several researchers in this school have developed different empirical theologies (empirical theology as functional science, process theology, radical empirical theology). For Bernard Meland, the dichotomy between subject and object no longer exists. He refuses the objective and rational categories of his predecessors. Human perception itself is grounded in the continuity between body and spirit. It is fundamentally open to foreign or transcendent dimensions of its existence. The “surplus” of an experience will be conceptualized and described. This very work produces the content of a theology. The Chicago school is committed to welcoming intersubjective and selfevident perceptions from daily life without a priori.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 137

25-09-2021 09:26:40

138

Chapter 3

(c) At the origin of a new school of practical theology influential in the Netherlands, Johannes A. van der Ven completely inverts the first model presented. It is insufficient to use empirical science for practical theology or to privilege dialogue between the two sciences; theology must become empirical in its very substance. It must appropriate this new paradigm, aiming to totally integrate empiricism to better respond to the needs of people today. Van der Ven is concerned with the future survival of Christianity. If there is a future, it will be on condition of accepting this adaptation to the needs of its contemporaries.100 (d) “In the beginning, there is wonder.” We might thus introduce this fourth school of empirical theology promoted by Protestant practical theologians at the University of Frankfurt. Its fundamental research is inscribed in the perspective of a “lived religion.” They are not the only ones to employ this perspective, since the terms “quotidian” and “lived religion” are also central for other models of practical theology, most often decided in advance in favor of a theological or philosophical notion with a practical goal.101 For example, this is the case for Wilhelm Gräb, who constructs a practical theology of “lived religion” focused on the meaning of life. His practical theology turns into a cultural hermeneutic and religion becomes a key explaining the meaning of life.102 Such limiting of the religious field would not receive the approval of the theologians of Frankfurt. Access to “lived religion” cannot be limited to typically religious notions or other classifications. Research is not directed by the objected designated “religious,” but tries to attain the pre-reflexive immediacy and obviousness of daily human experience. The foremost thinkers in this school try to get as close to human experience as possible. In this logic, no daily experience can be defined in advance by a “religious” intentionality. However, banal or repetitive, extraordinary or unique, all human experiences fall within the researcher’s scope. Religion is not determined by recourse to the sociology of religions or religious studies, but in the phenomenological sense of daily human life (Husserl).103 The empirical study of “lived religion” sees itself as open to all phenomena. Understanding of “religions” will remain necessarily hazy in this perspective. Experience understood in a phenomenological perspective will always be perceived as something already-there. “Lived religion” concerns not only the cognitive side of a phenomenon, but practices of life as well. It is ultimately a matter of detecting experiences which humans experience daily, which they designate as uncommon. To perceive these experiences, to describe them by methods adequate to thus reconstruct “lived religion”—such is the program of this empiricalphenomenological Frankfurt school. What, then, is its theological interest, seeing as all pre-established religious definitions are swept aside

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 138

25-09-2021 09:26:40

Contextual Characteristics

139

straightaway? The goal is to reestablish contact between theology and daily life. Challenges Empirical theology sees itself as complementing other functional or substantive definitions of religion. The approach of the Frankfurt school is surprising due to their extreme desire to bring the researcher as close as possible to all human experience, religious or not. As the phenomenon is primary and prioritized, it surpasses all captivity to theory and requires one’s complete attention. If the “religious” phenomenon already exists, it is not constituted by humans. Phenomenology tries to reconstruct “lived religion,” thus separating itself from all traditional research focused on an already-delineated “religious” field. Practical theology thus leaves behind its traditional field of study (the church), opening itself to religion in general and daily life itself. Turning thus toward empiricism signifies an unprecedented paradigm shift for continental theology. Of course, the question has been posed as to whether understanding reality through phenomenology really corresponds to theological “realities.” Some lines of study in empirical theology are comparable with the concept of contextualization. The second pole of contextualization—the context of the life of humans—is particularly interested in their lived experience, a theme dear to empirical theology. Empirical theology turns out to be fruitful for a missiology of the Western context, in the sense that it offers a fresh new approach to human experience without being filtered through traditional notions of religion in general and Christianity in particular. The Legacy of Christianization The fifth contextual section privileges an historical approach. Christianity was not the only important religion in Europe. But we will limit ourselves here to Christianity to ask if its legacy is an advantage or an inconvenience to be accounted for by a new contextualization of the Gospel in the West. The evangelization of the European continent had already begun in New Testament times. Other waves of Christianization followed. Christianity impregnated the European culture in a unique (but not exclusive) way. If the Christianity of the high Middle Ages found itself at its apogee in many ways, it also saw movements of recession during the modern era. Christianity was not only confronted with the crises of secularization in the primary sense of the term (e.g., the French Revolution), but was subjected to a secularization in a larger sense, beginning with the churches’ loss of political power, progressing to abandonment of ecclesial practice, and finishing in a confinement of everything “religious” in the private sphere.104 The

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 139

25-09-2021 09:26:40

140

Chapter 3

historical phenomena of Christianization, but also of secularization, imply representations of realities which are worth examining. What does it mean that Europe was Christianized?105 What was the real degree of “faith” among European peoples? And if this continent really was not so impregnated by Christianity—if, on the contrary, indigenous cults had more influence on Christianity—would the notion of dechristianization still be meaningful? First, we will explore various expressions. Second, we will analyze the real state of Christianity. Third, we will study historical “obstacles” which this European Christianization has left for contemporary evangelization. Fourth and finally, we will enumerate the values which European Christianity has bequeathed to contemporary culture. Various Expressions “Dechristianization, re-Christianization, and secularization” are terms with a complex and contradictory history. They were born at the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth century in a polemical context, which means that they have at least partly become veritable “fighting” words, used here and there by members of opposing parties. They should be used with prudence and always situated in their context. In a historical and narrow sense, the term “secularization” signifies the transfer of goods from the church toward a civil institution, or the passage from a religious to a secular state. The French word déchristianisation is closely linked to the appearance of a socio-pastoral brochure, La France, pays de mission? written in 1943 by the two priests Godin and Daniel. It observed a “déchristianisation” among workers in Paris and its suburbs. The book constitutes a mark of the polemic between those who observed a dechristianization of the country and those who instead saw glimpses of spiritual renewal. Beyond its polemical usage, historians link dechristianization to a concept of the decline of Christianity—which, in the French case, of course, was sparked by the Revolution. From the birth of their discipline in France, sociologists of religion adopted the term “dechristianization.” Henri Desroche, for example, conceptualizes this expression in five “types of recession”: recession of religious practice, de-clericalization (in which clergy lose their influence over believers), deconfessionalization (regression of confessional control), desacralization (the sacred loses its place in profane life), and deaxiologization (the regression of normative moral values).106 His colleagues have abandoned this term, seeing it as too closely tied to Roman Catholicism, instead preferring secularization. Ultimately, this involved re-importing a term used in the Anglo-Saxon world by Max Weber, who had introduced it in his theoretical structure. French sociologists thus

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 140

25-09-2021 09:26:41

Contextual Characteristics

141

rallied to the Weberian concept of secularization. They abandoned the “fallacious word” dechristianization (according to Gabriel Le Bras), selecting an expression facilitating better understanding of different religious mutations. Isambert sketches two faces of secularization thus: on the one hand, it is a religious change of society (religions retreat and the profane sphere becomes autonomous); on the other, it is a change of religion itself, which translates into its adaptation to the new situation. Hervieu-Léger goes even further in her concern for properly framing this theory. Her starting point is modernity (and its gains in technical-economic, juridical-political, and philosophical-psychological fields), which transforms religion to the point that relations between religion and society morph into two autonomous spaces. However, according to Hervieu-Léger, secularization is not only defined by a retreat of the influence of religions, but also by a return or re-composition of the “religious.” In establishing the facts of a dechristianization, historians have equally made the contrary observation of a renewal of the religious, which they then qualify as re-Christianization. Contemporary times are not the only ones to have seen the decline of Christianity. Its regression stopped for a time due to the development of various confessions of faith in the variety of new churches in Germany in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. In France, there was a renewal of Catholicism in the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century. We might also evoke the waves of various historical Protestant Awakenings. The French tradition added a fourth term: laïcisation, a national variant of secularization which places special emphasis on the social process of this mutation. This transformation is marked by increasingly tense relations between clerical and anti-clerical parties, resulting in a particular laicity “à la française.”107 The Real State of Christianization Observing a movement of receding Christianity called “dechristianization” implies the pre-existence of one or several Christianized states, which seems obvious in the case of Europe. The ensemble of peoples “converted” to Christianity throughout the centuries, through efforts toward Christianization, formed Christendom. The vitality of Christendom was undeniable for centuries. It is still visible in Europe despite the effects of secularization, at least in its aesthetic and institutional aspects. Constant recourse to Christendom by specialists and by the average person creates representations of this latter which stray far from its reality. The interest of French historians in dechristianization was initially provoked by its contemporary expressions. But other studies have shown the regression of Christianity already in previous

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 141

25-09-2021 09:26:41

142

Chapter 3

periods—for example, the French Revolution and its primordial role, or beyond French borders, the Enlighteners and even the Reformations of the sixteenth century. If the limits of dechristianization are pushed further and further back in history, it becomes even harder to specify the tipping point from Christianization to dechristianization. Jean Delumeau was not satisfied with this interpretive schema and reversed it. He expressed his critique primarily in the three last chapters of his 1971 book Le Catholicisme entre Luther et Voltaire.108 Delumeau thought the Christianization in play during the Middle Ages was superficial. Delumeau cited medievalist Le Goff, who points in the same direction: “Around 1500, Christendom was almost a missionary destination.”109 Delumeau continued his analysis of the state of Christianity in the time of the Old Regime, during which it was characterized by a mix of practices and doctrines quite far from the evangelical ideal. According to Delumeau, the notion of dechristianization thus does not make sense, because such a twisted Christianity calls for purification through a justified critique. For Delumeau, true Christianization of peoples took place during the Reformations as the fruit of the enormous post-Tridentine Catholic missionary effort in the seventeenth century (for the French context), which attained a large part of the population. Claude Langlois summarizes Delumeau’s thought: “In this perspective, when measured against the yardstick of a preceding weak Christianization, dechristianization is really only the disappearance of a false Christianity.”110 The Christianization of nine-tenths of the population, the rural areas of the time, was only a phenomenon of modern times—“which means that one could only talk of medieval Christendom in this respect through an abuse of language or to hang onto a myth of a golden age.”111 Thus, for Delumeau, the criteria of evaluation of Christianity seem to be rather of a theological order. Consequently, the demands he places upon Christianity are stringent.112 The depth and efficacity of Christianization in the Middle Ages were questioned by other historians in specific studies. Delumeau’s initial question was taken up again in 1994 by Anton Wessels, this time from a missiological perspective.113 He analyzes three host contexts of Christianity to understand its actual influence. But influence is just a subordinate question: a more important question concerns the nature of the transformation of the host cultures by Christianity, and inversely, the mutation of Christianity after its encounter with other cultures. These questions are clearly inscribed in the logic of contextualization analyzed by the missiologist. The two models of Christianization known in Europe and repeated by Wessels are the principle of tabula rasa—that is, the abolition of the host culture (represented by Boniface, apostle to the Germanic peoples)—and the principle of adaptation (which was superficial, and represented by pope Gregory the Great). But beyond principles, history records very complex cultural and religious

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 142

25-09-2021 09:26:41

Contextual Characteristics

143

transformations and unconscious modes of contextualization. We will summarize Wessel’s study. (a) The encounter with the Greco-Roman context was marked by the political “victory” of Christianity over Roman paganism in 380 A.D. at the time of the emperor Theodosius. Christianity became a state religion following the conversion of Constantine. Obviously, the new political power of Christianity allowed it to impose a kind of Christianization, yet without eradicating pagan belief. Due to its aspiration to a certain “redemption,” the Hellenistic culture’s receptivity toward Christianity should also be noted. This need perfectly suited the redemptive proposition of the “new religion.” (b) In the Celtic culture, notably in Ireland, Christianity fought against the influence of pagan religions (e.g., of the druids). But monastic life was not hostile to the existent culture. On the contrary, service to man was at the center of monastic life. The first Christian leaders integrated elements of paganism in their own religious practice. Typical Celt places of veneration were often transformed into places of Christian worship without being radically abolished. The “success” of Christianization was certainly linked to the relatively peaceable transition from Celtic paganism to Christianity. Christianity itself adopted Celtic gods, “holy places,” and “holy festivals,” thus allowing for some cultural continuity. Wessels concludes that Christianity owes a considerable debt to the pagan preChristian tradition of Ireland. (c) The God of Christians in the Germanic context was presented as the hero of war, as the king. Christ was the Savior for Germans because he was the strongest, having strength surpassing that of their own known gods. This factor played a primordial role in the Christianization of northern European peoples. The church tried to replace pagan customs with a new content, without necessarily changing their forms: pagan processions, festivals, and symbols were successively transformed and “Christianized.” By contrast, according to the study of conversions, it seems that the difference between Christ and the former gods was absolute. The continuity of the ancestral religion played a role only on the level of customs.114 Through Wessels’ analyses, we can recognize the complex interaction between the Gospel and cultures during Christianization. Of course, this interaction did not leave these religions unscathed, but neither did it completely abolish them. More importantly, Christianity itself was informed by existing religions and transformed more than Western Christians realized. Which of these two parties was dominant over the other? This remains a

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 143

25-09-2021 09:26:42

144

Chapter 3

difficult question. In certain contexts, Christianity was decisively shaped by the host culture. This thesis is supported by historian James C. Russell, who studied the Christianization of the Germanic peoples between 376–754 AD.115 For Russell, we can only speak of Christianization of these peoples after the eight century, if we give this term a relativist and subjective definition in which the substance of the Christian faith is not immutable. If we gravitate toward this definition, Russell consequently seeks to specify the form of this Christianity: it would be necessarily Germanic! It is in this sense that the title of his monograph—The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity—must be understood. The Negative Legacy of Christianization We have noted the superficial form of Christianization in the Middle Ages and the transformation of ancient Christianity during this process. These two elements nevertheless do not lead us to deny the evidence that Christianity has indeed shaped the general history of Europe. Is this long history of Christian mission an advantage or an inconvenience for contemporary evangelism? The contemporary missiologist needs to know what positive and negative heritage this history has bequeathed them. We will begin with the negative side and its repercussions for the present. The Constantinian turn and its impact on Europe until the end of the second millennium cannot be underestimated. Christianity, oppressed or persecuted from its very origin but expanding during the first centuries, suddenly attained the status of the official religion of the Empire. In several decades, intolerance toward Christianity changed to tolerance, while paganism underwent an inverse progression, enduring persecutions. With the fall of the Empire, “catholic” Christians were dispersed among the barbarian kingdoms. The Christianization of these (Frank, Anglo-Saxon, Visigoth, and Lombard) kingdoms stretched from the fifth to the eighth century. Their rulers tolerated Christians at first, showing them increasing favor until their conversion, then prohibited pagan practices. The conversion of Clovis was decisive for the ulterior construction of Western Christendom. He chose the “catholic” religion against all other barbarian kings who had embraced Arianism. Little by little, Clovis managed to construct the power of his Germanic tribe to the point of assuring its political domination, which also allowed for the victory of Catholicism in the West. The Carolingian dynasty, successors to the Merovingians, bound themselves to the pope three centuries later and thus fortified their position. The peak of this evolution was the Germanic empire of Charlemagne. This new empire and the papacy thus formed a theocracy— the foundation of the Western Christendom of the Middle Ages.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 144

25-09-2021 09:26:42

Contextual Characteristics

145

A new missionary wave of Irish (among the Alemanni, the Thuringians, and the Bavarians) and Anglo-Saxon origin (among the Bavarians, the Frisians, and the Hessian Franks—notably for Boniface, the “apostle to the Germans”) from the sixth to eighth centuries was decisive for Christianization in Germany. Charlemagne enlarged the kingdom of the Franks, He integrated Frisia and Saxony. At the turn of the millennium, the Christianization of Scandinavia, of the Slavs, and of Poland was underway. The last regions of present-day Northern Germany only became “Christian” around 1300. This leads us to say that the Christianization of Germany extended over a long time, around one century. The characteristics of these missionary waves are extremely variable, beyond the simplistic evocation of forced conversion. The “methods” varied from one context and period to another. Force was certainly employed but was rarely the only means for convincing pagans. An evangelization through conviction also existed. Historian Bruno Dumézil analyzed the method of “conversion” to Christianity among the four barbarian kingdoms from the fifth to eighth centuries. For the first two centuries, he discerns a contradictory practice among the bishops: on the one hand, a condemnation of evangelistic violence; on the other, a framework which should “condemn non-Christians to social death” (primarily in the cities). Barbarian rulers or Arians generally tolerated the prelates, later turning toward Nicaean Christianity themselves. They saw to it that their own aristocracy followed them in this new path. Henceforth, the king himself ensured the conversion of the majority of his subjects. To attain this objective, he used punishment, pressure, and decrees. The episcopate looked unfavorably on this encroachment of its own prerogatives. Bishops and kings gradually worked hand in hand in the individual interest of both parties. Out of the uniformizing effort of their kingdoms, forced conversions increased, though always to different extents. A new Christian society was to be born. In this society, monasticism played a large role in the Christianization of rural areas. The pressure on the monks was also placed on high-ranking laypersons who used the bonds of social dependence to achieve the end of conversion. Of course, Christians could not change religion in this era. Discipline from both of bishops and rulers no longer allowed for deviation in religious matters.116 From the seventh century onward, when the Merovingian king went to conquer new regions inhabited by another political structure marked by the absence of Christianity, new forms of mission were invented. The new figure of the missionary was necessarily ambiguous, nourished by the Christian ideal and the indispensable support of the sovereign. “The birth of armed mission” dates from this era.117 Irish monks were missionaries against their will since they were primarily motivated by the ascetic ideal of pilgrimage. Their missionary activities

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 145

25-09-2021 09:26:42

146

Chapter 3

were founded on this ideal but could not produce durable and structured fruits. Consolidation was rather the work of Anglo-Saxon missionaries. Their methods, preaching, the destruction of sanctuaries as “proof” of the power of the God of Christians, the creation of monasteries as places of cultural transformation, all come closer to models of non-coercive Christianization. By contrast, the reign of Charlemagne again legitimized violence in connection with the propagation of the Gospel. Christianity could become a reason employed by desire for political expansion. Severe political pressure to introduce Christian rites followed the Carolingian conquest. But efforts at teaching the population sweetened this combative Christianization.118 We can differentiate three phases in the Christianization of Europe: the rapid advance of catholic Christianity through a “civilization of conversion”119 among the barbarian kingdoms from the fifth to the eighth centuries; Irish and Anglo-Saxon efforts at rather non-coercive conversions; and the “mission army” of the Carolingian and post-Carolingian eras. We cannot extend this analysis to modern times. But the demonstration has been made of this often-unhappy alliance between the preaching of the Good News and violence. Forced Christianization left a heavy heritage in the religious mentality of a people. It might be the reason for an even bigger dechristianization when compared with regions which were Christianized peaceably, as Geller seems to propose for the case of the New States of Germany.120 Other expressions of violence have resounded throughout the political history of the West to the point that the message of Christ has been completely perverted.121 A secondary effect of our historical study of conversion methods allows us to highlight the direct relation between political power and churches.122 These relations benefited either party at various times in the advancement of their projects: each needed the other’s legitimacy in this political situation. Since Constantine, European Christianity has largely held to this logic, abandoning a substantial part of its message. The (Roman Catholic—though also the Lutheran and Reformed after the Reformation) church had acquired considerable material power over the centuries. It taught a message of fear reinforced with corresponding actions. As Delumeau highlights, the church became totalitarian and compromised the institution and its message in a lasting manner.123 The alliance between the church and rulers politicized the action of the former. This principle also applied to mission. For Shenk, thus politicized, mission was no longer necessary after Christianization (as evoked above). Mission had been historically accomplished and outmoded by the establishment of Christendom and was thus useless. Later, the critique of the totalitarian church certainly included one of its activities most directly in the service of its quest for power—that is, its missionary activity.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 146

25-09-2021 09:26:43

Contextual Characteristics

147

The Positive Contribution of Christianization Judgment of these practices which contradict the Gospel ought to be leveled without concession, but also without obscuring Christianization’s positive contribution to European and Western culture. The violence carried out by other pre- and post-Christian political and religious powers should also be analyzed. The pride of modern critics might quickly fade if, for example, we were to count the victims of the totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century. Christianity is not the only one criticized for its violent behavior; other religions exhibit such violence as well. Analysts should guard against all anachronisms. History is what it is. Christianization in Europe included violence, but despite or because of this Christianization, new nations and states were born, which also sometimes needed religious legitimation from the churches. This latter element is not questioned today by larger society; but one should also accept other positive elements of Christianity’s historical legacy. We see that it is difficult to separate the positive and negative elements of this knotted history; everything seems interlocked. Christian history in Europe is ambiguous. But this ambiguity should not hide that Christianity generated a new civilization and that thousands of people and churchgoers tried to remain faithful to the demands of the Gospel. Certain names are known for their Christian heritage, though most have sunk into anonymity. We can only present part of the positive legacy of Christianity which is dispersed and anchored in the various strata of our Western culture. We will proceed by following several authors. (a) Philippe Nemo presented Christianity’s contribution to European culture in the domains of charity (which surpasses the concern for justice), of the conception of linear time, of Greek thought and Roman law put at the service of ethics, and of biblical eschatology (the “Papal Revolution” of the eleventh to thirteenth centuries). (b) Philologist Erich Auerbach insisted on the biblical origin of the particular literary style of Western culture.124 (c) Historian Karl Ferdinand Werner finds the seed of the Europeans’ progressive attitudes in the Bible: it would thus be at the origin of the typically European urge (in German, Unruhe, Aufbruchstimmung [Fr. élan]) which facilitated its search for change and freedom.125 (d) Peter Harrison works more particularly on the relation of Protestantism and the emergence of the natural sciences. He postulates that biblical content and the style of biblical interpretation greatly influenced the development of scientific concepts of nature. The birth of modern science would thus be linked to Protestant textual hermeneutics. This approach would thus have created the conditions of scientific investigation and technical exploitation of nature.126

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 147

25-09-2021 09:26:43

148

Chapter 3

Challenges The history of Christianity in Europe is long. Its legacy cannot be simply separated into positive and negative elements. History is always a “mixed” tale with both dark and light pages. A contemporary European missiology must imperatively take cognizance of the woes caused by Christianity, without succumbing to an ahistorical miserabilism which no longer permits one to see the gains which this civilization has seen by way of this impetus. The challenges of such a missiology play out in the domains of repentance for Christian perversions committed, in a work of critical and theological remembering which can separate these excesses from the evangelical ideal, in sorting out positive and negative representations of Christianity and historical reality, in a theology of laicity and modernity, and in a renewed ecclesiology which freshly reworks pre-Constantinian models. According to Delumeau, the effects of dechristianization have somewhat purified the unhealthy political ambitions of Christianity in Europe. But its civilizing project has bequeathed “a structural and determining element” to our modern world.127 The transformations of secularization have been largely imposed on Christianity—justifiably so, in many cases—which allows churches a new missionary perspective today on the basis of well-defined roles among political and religious powers. One thing is certain: churches can no longer dream of the restoration of European Christendom. Their historical past should incite them instead to profound humility, to a renewal of their ecclesiology, and to concern for their own sanctification before moving toward a new, humble, and compelling proclamation of the Gospel. A new contextualization of the Gospel in the West cannot gloss over these various forms of informal and historical contextualizations of Christianity. We will never be in the situation of a first-time proclamation of the Gospel, even if entire contemporary generations know nothing of it today. This lends to the real complexity of our undertaking. We are in a secularized Europe which draws its origins from the subterranean springs of its history. A new contextualization in Europe and the West must take account both of this total ignorance of the evangelical message, and of the inalienable imprint of Christianity on the West. It must consider certain “perverted” elements of Christianity which have been integrated into European culture and which are counterproductive to a new proclamation of the Gospel. A new contextualization will have the difficult and delicate task of living in radical rupture with certain old informal missionary models, all while knowing that from a historical perspective, these disjunctions are not always possible and only happen by way of slow processes. A new contextualization will superimpose itself on the many Christian layers of a long 2,000-year history in Europe.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 148

25-09-2021 09:26:43

Contextual Characteristics

149

Demography and Migration The following characteristics lead toward “hard” elements of the religious context in Europe and the West. The demographic and migratory elements are determinative for the future “religious face” of Europe. Some of these challenges were already evoked in the section “Christians from the South in the West.” We are particularly concerned with two specific questions (treated, respectively, in the next two sections): the development of Islam, and the place of the European religious situation in relation to evolving global patterns. (1) European peoples are confronted with a great demographic challenge which has announced its presence for some time now,128 but which has only been mediatized for several years.129 In practically all European countries, fertility rates have dropped below the figure necessary to maintain the population (2.1 children per woman). This reduction also concerns “catholic” countries like Italy or Spain (who showed a fertility rate of around 1.3 children per woman in 2006), whose fertility rate was formerly significantly higher. We can observe the same phenomenon in Eastern Europe, with a rate approaching that of Italy and Spain.130 For a long time the troubling inverse situation of majority world countries provoked a discourse of limiting the number of children. It is as if these remarks had in some way obscured the contrary trend among industrialized countries. The path moving from this situation toward an augmentation of fertility rates through measures of family politics does not seem clear. It takes a long time to invert a demographic trend. Raising the birth rate to guarantee the renewal of the existing population is one thing; making a population grow is another. To overturn population shrinkage with fewer and fewer women giving birth to fewer and fewer children would require a spectacular growth in the number of pregnancies. For the present moment, this seems unrealistic. Already a generation of genitor parents is lacking. Population decline is inevitable since the necessary interventions would had to have happened long ago. In any case, the diminishment of fertility likewise entails an aging of society which is already favorized by increased lifespans. We are confronted with an aging society with an increased average age. (2) The consequences of this demographic evolution are predictable: (a) The social contract between the generations will be unbalanced. Fewer and fewer professionally active persons will have to support more and more professionally inactive persons. It will require significant investment to provide for the retirements, care, and assistance for a high number of aged persons.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 149

25-09-2021 09:26:43

150

Chapter 3

(b) The economy will lack qualified collaborators to occupy vacant posts and maintain or develop competition. The potential reduction of unemployment in industrialized societies will probably be more linked to the demographic element than to a circumstantial acceleration. (c) Immigration is inevitable to maintain a country’s population. This evolution imposes itself both because of demographic reality and in the most prudent attempts of demographers to envisage future scenarios. Beyond political questions concerning a regulated immigration, the real “authorized” or “clandestine” migratory flux will not be able to fill the present and future demographic deficit in most European countries. (3) We can illustrate these remarks with the four countries examined in our study. France seems to be the “good pupil” among the European nations, with a fertility rate attaining the fateful threshold of population renewal. While the United Kingdom falls among the higher fertility rates (1.84 in 2006), this is insufficient to maintain the size of its population. Germany has undergone a drop in population since 1972, which is covered over by significant waves of immigration. Its rate of fertility (1.4 children per thirty-year-old woman in 2003; 1.32 in 2006) ranks among the lowest. For the New States, the numbers are even more shocking; they fell from 1.52 to 0.77 children per woman between 1990 and 1994, which is the lowest recorded rate in the world!131 Eastern Germany is heading toward a dramatic population decline. Youths and women already tend to leave this region. Germany transformed itself into the “immigration” country par excellence, despite its politicians’ affirmations to the contrary. Already during the 1980s Germany beat the immigration rates of other countries who were better known for their tradition of welcoming immigrants. Germany welcomed 1,022 immigrants per 100,000 inhabitants at this time (245 for the USA, 479 for Canada, 694 for Australia). This rate climbed to 1,566 per 100,000 inhabitants after 1989.132 For the eastern countries, an unexpected demographic change intervened after this same decisive year. Against all prognostications, practically all these countries experienced a light decline in the number of their inhabitants and a low fertility rate. For Romania, this was notable in 2006, with 1.31 children per woman. The demographic evolution of Russia is even more unsettling: a significant reduction in life expectancy in the 1990s aggravated the deficient demographic situation.133 (4) According to Wetzel, three factors determine the change in religious composition of a society: persons who change “religion,” migration, and population growth.134 These two latter elements are primordial and must be accounted for in the development of a Western missiology. These

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 150

25-09-2021 09:26:43

Contextual Characteristics

151

elements transform religious Europe perhaps as much as properly religious mutations. The reduction in the number of Christians in Europe is linked to this demographic factor. Populations which were traditionally Christian are not renewing themselves demographically. ( 5) A missiological project in the West should make a priority of concerning itself with the lives of the increasingly multitudinous aged population in our society. It should support young persons who are and who will be exposed to heavy burdens. And it should also develop a missiology of absent persons—that is, the generations of children who incarnate the hope of life. The fourth group of priority obviously concerns immigrants.135 Whether we like it or not, immigration will be the inevitable path for an aging Europe. If only for utilitarian reasons (maintaining the economy and the standard of living), Europeans will go along with it. But this immigration will raise immense challenges of integration for which “missionary Christians” and missionaries will be highly qualified in light of their intercultural competencies. Integration will also be raised in ecclesiological terms with the arrival of Christian migrants. Will this ecclesiology be identitary (so-called “ethnic” churches), or will it reflect cultural intermingling? Will local churches be able to welcome new Christian expressions which are both living and exotic? This welcome is one side of the coin; the path toward the new “arrivals” who do not know Christ is the other. Above all else, the challenge of evangelizing these persons raises the question of the spiritual vitality of Western churches. Islam in Europe The place of Islam in Europe is directly linked to the characteristics evoked in the previous section. “In our day, Islam had become the most fashionable topic” writes Frégosi in his latest book.136 As with the theme of immigration, he notes a mediatized effervescence which is not particularly favorable to the perception of reality. In general, we are presented with a scenario describing a wave of Muslims breaking in Europe via massive immigration and natality rates, with an Islamization of the population and radicalization of this religion as the cherry on top. The “European” subconscious thus forgets that the “Muslim invasion” was already predicted a century ago, and that this continent has a long common history with this religion since the high Middle Ages. Neither Christians nor Muslims have any reason to be proud of their history in matters of religious tolerance. The crusades and the Spanish reconquista weigh heavily on the Christian conscience, but the brutality of the expansionist combative politics of the Muslim world from the seventh through the seventeenth centuries surpasses these two quasi-exclusive examples from the opposing camp.137

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 151

25-09-2021 09:26:44

152

Chapter 3

The Figures As for the current Muslim presence in Europe, it is worth beginning with a look at the figures. If we define Europe as a geographical space stretching from Ireland to the Carpathians (all the candidate and member countries of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, but excluding Turkey—thirtyfour countries in total), we could count around 23.8 million Muslims,138 corresponding to about 4.6% of the overall population. In Western European states overall, this number is around 4.3% (ten countries plus Switzerland and Norway); the other seventeen members of the European Union count only 1.1% Muslims. The five candidate countries for EU membership place the entirety of their Muslim population at 28.8%. This rate is high, but the population of the five countries (25.1 million persons) does not substantially change the overall average. If one day the Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova join the EU, they will certain bring 60 million additional persons, but with almost no Muslims. By contrast, we must not forget the case of the Russian Federation, which is situated outside of our continent. It includes a great number of Muslims—between 15 and 20 million (10–14%) in a population of 143 million persons. The size of this part of the population corresponds to the overall number of Muslims in Europe (the twenty-seven member countries, Switzerland, and Norway). A third of the 24 million Muslims in Europe represent a population which has been established for a long time. The European country with the greatest number of Muslims is France. The seventeen countries which have since joined the EU know almost nothing of a “Muslim Europe” (with the exception of Bulgaria). The question of Turkey’s integration in the EU is still open. Its 70 million citizens are nearly all Muslims. If we add its population to the other European states, the overall population of the EU would then be 591 million citizens. In this figure, around 94 million citizens would be Muslims, which amounts to 15.9% of the population.139 But we are currently far from this latter figure. For now, we will use the figure of around 5% Muslims in Europe. This low percentage contradicts the thesis of a European Islamization. The Birth Rate One factor which could change the situation is the birth rate. Muslim families with numerous children and schools with high rates of Muslim children are part of our daily observations. But upon a closer look, Muslim countries surrounding Europe are currently experiencing a decline in birth rates. The 2006 birth rates of the following countries speak clearly: 2.03 children per woman for Albania; 1.22 in Bosnia; 1.91 in Turkey; 2.68 in Morocco; 1.98 in Algeria; and 1.74 in Tunisia. Iran holds the greatest surprise, with a decline in this rate from six to two children per woman between 1986 and 2000. This

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 152

25-09-2021 09:26:44

Contextual Characteristics

153

decline in the birth rate of surrounding countries certainly plays an important role regarding Muslim populations in Europe, which are also experiencing a decline in birth rates beginning with the second generation.140 The Difficulty of Comparison To establish statistics on the number of Muslims without first defining this term might lead to error. Indeed, everything depends on this definition. Is it linked to an “ethnic” or a “religious” notion? Jenkins calls attention to the fact that statisticians often employ the definition offered by the Muslim community: a Muslim is any individual who has a Muslim father or who grew up in such a community. This “ethnic” definition is not often applied to “Christians” circumscribed by a “religious” classification. The “religious” definition requires a knowledge and practice by the person to be included by statisticians. The two types of classification are not homogeneous and cannot give rise to an honest comparative study. If we applied a cultural-ethnic definition to “Christians,” we would obtain a much higher number of Christians. If by contrast we were to opt for a restrictive “religious” definition, the number of Muslims would be lower than the figures usually put forward. In the case of a cultural definition of the belonging of European peoples, Jenkins demonstrates that Christians would be twenty times more numerous than Muslims.141 Practice The question of definition points back to practice. As with Christians, not all Muslims are practicing, and their practice may diverge from one ethnic origin to another. The practice of Muslims142 is probably higher than that of Christians, even allowing for the difficulty of comparing two completely different things. Surveys (in 1992 and 2005) have demonstrated the diversity of practice of Muslims in France. Only 29% of Algerians—who make up the largest contingent of Muslims in France—practiced their religion in 1992. Only 21% of Muslims went to a religious service once or twice per month in 2005.143 We should conclude that a portion of the 24 million Muslims in Europe (necessarily using the ethnic definition) ought to be considered as non-practicing. And “non-practicing” implies “secularization.” Powerful elements of modernity such as individualism, materialism, feminism, or even privatization of religion affect the Muslim culture in Europe. A minority of Muslim extremists see in modern culture an expression of the perversion of Christianity and of the West. They resist and polemicize against this civilization. But they do not represent the majority. Several million Muslims have already imbibed the Western value of tolerance and can no longer be considered vectors of religious power. Many signs tend to suggest that the effects

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 153

25-09-2021 09:26:44

154

Chapter 3

of secularization transform Muslims and the interpretation of the Quran in the direction of adaptation to the values of modernity.144 We are aware that “secularized Muslims” probably identify more with their community (and their religion) than “secularized Christians.” The forces of radicalization of Islam are also at work in Europe, and we can never completely exclude Islamization.145 Islam can demonstrate a religious expression adapted to modernity in the West, which is not necessarily the case on other continents. Challenges The future of Muslim presence in Europe depends on these general elements evoked: the amplitude of immigration, the birth rate, and the adaptation or rejection of modern culture. The political factor also plays a principal role, but remains indeterminate, of course. We must not forget that the Muslim world is heterogeneous on both ethnic and religious levels. Diversity also plays an important role within each community. Regarding immigration, Muslims are not the only ones to abandon their homelands. Other persons with other religions take the same route. As we have seen, there are also Christians with a fervent faith among these migrants. In his book, Jenkins also touches on the immigration of these “new” Christians. Against all the defenders of secularization, he highlights a continuing vitality of Christianity in Europe. The crisis of Western Christianity is not minimized, but he also detects signs of renewal in various Christian denominations, which other observers overlook.146 His observation culminates in the comparison of two religious minorities in Europe: Muslims and evangelical, charismatic, and Pentecostal Christians (the three most dynamic Christian movements). Referring to Barrett, Jenkins asserts that in 2000, the total number of these “Christian minorities” (59 million) was nearly double the number of Muslims (32 million).147 This comparison interrogates Europeans habituated to an “expansionist” media presentation of Islam on the one hand and a “death” of Christianity on the other. European missiologists must advance with prudence in predicting the evolution of different religions and prepare a theology of missionary encounter with Islam. They can assist in the de-dramatization of Muslim presence in Europe, ensuring its just perception and comprehension, and facilitating interreligious dialogue and peaceable missionary confrontation, since Christianity and Islam are both “missionary religions”—one with an explicit theology, the other with an implicit practice.148 Model or Exception? The evolution of the religious situation in Europe is not only dependent on internal dynamics. In preceding sections, we have presented external

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 154

25-09-2021 09:26:45

Contextual Characteristics

155

elements which alter the “religious equilibrium” of the continent. Will external or internal dynamics have more influence? Either Europe will charge itself as the religious “model,” leading other cultures along in the inevitable process of secularization already experienced by Europeans, or on the contrary, this continent will only be the taillight on the caboose of a more pressing global evolution. In this latter case, secularized Europe would be defined by its exceptional character, contrasted with a religious effervescence on the other continents. Whatever the case may be, Europe cannot be analyzed in an isolated manner without accounting for the forces of globalization. This section follows a comparative method in the perspective “Europe—United States—world.”149 The typically European “religious” landscape is thus relativized by other notable world trends. (1) The sociological models of secularization derived from observations of the current religious state of Europe have always clashed with another modern culture, the United States. The religious vitality and pluralism of this country have always surprised (European?) observers. Confronted with this country, the fundamental presupposition of the theory of secularization (that the effects of modernity curb religious fervor and belonging) is almost inverted. Modernity pairs nicely with religiosity in the American context. This country simultaneously appears as the nation of perfect church-state separation and the country of religiosity par excellence. If for European sociologists, secularization always includes a double meaning (a long-term historical process with the transformation of social structures in a broad sense, and the lowering of religiosity and practice among individuals more narrowly), their American colleagues only work with the second element of this theory, assuming secularization as a given element of society since the independence of their country. The partisans of the paradigm of secularization—a model completely assimilated to European culture as an inheritance of the Enlightenment— see in the “religiosity” particular to Americans only one last somersault before a definitive plunge which would bring the nation closer to the European situation. Religious decline seems so obvious that European sociologists explain the American context as a “deviation” from the European “norm.” But clearly this model had to give way to another mode of explanation better adapted to its object of study. This happened in the 1980s with the American construction of a theory essentially based on the economy: supply side is an economic theory which purports that an economic capacity to produce more goods is the most effective manner to stimulate economic growth. The theory of rational choice supposes that actors act out of rational choices, analyzing in terms of costs and benefits and choosing behavior which incurs the lowest costs and offers

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 155

25-09-2021 09:26:45

156

Chapter 3

the highest benefits.150 The combination of the two principles leads to a model which can convincingly explain the American religious effervescence, with its wide array of “products” on the “religious market” and the behavior of “consumers.” Better, the model also seems applicable to the European context: since the “offer” of religious material is monopolized and scarce, the “market” is not stimulated and the “clients” are prone to lower “consumption.” The “price” of the “merchandise” seems to high; this is the second reason that the European “consumer” remains indifferent when confronted with the “products.” This time, American sociologists can pride themselves on the superiority of their model. According to their logic, the European case is exception. But the American theories also prove to be as imperfect as those promoted by Europeans. They cannot explain the exceptional religiosity of countries like Poland, Ireland, or even Romania. The “Roman Catholic” or “orthodox” monopoly has not led to the impoverishment of the “religious market.” (2) We may thus propose an observation which falls between the two theories, derived from two different cultural contexts, which “model” their own religious situations, but which present deficiencies regarding opposing contexts. The historical background of this opposition of the two contexts is well-known: since the Declaration of Independence, American political culture is founded on the separation of the political and the religious. From the beginnings of its young history, it has experienced religious pluralism. European culture emancipated itself from religious oppression; it secured itself a freedom to abandon “religion.” In the United States, on the contrary, this freedom is a space to practice religion. Europe has lived through a particular relation between churches and states for more than a millennium with repercussions today, in which Davie grounds her postulate of “vicarious religion.”151 This religiosity of an active minority, on which a majority of persons occasionally rely, is inexistent in the USA. The emergence of an American civil religion, by contrast, finds no parallel of such breadth in most European democracies. History ultimately teaches that the two contexts are specific and unique and cannot be a “model” for the other. If we follow the perspective of “European” secularization, the United States must be considered as an exception. (3) Other observers perceive additional “exceptions”: Islam’s refusal of secularization in many countries; Hinduism, which has allowed for religious “awakening” in India; and the position of Japanese religions in an extremely technocratic nation. These examples upset the binary occidental comparison; in a global perspective, it will remain sterile. In this perspective, it turns out that the religious situation of the “old” continent takes on an exceptional character, an exception highlighted by Casanova

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 156

25-09-2021 09:26:45

Contextual Characteristics

157

and Davie.152 The theory of secularization retains real explanatory power. But in parallel, the American economic-religious model is taking on increasing importance in Europe. The behavior of religious actors is moving more and more toward an attitude of free choice and consumption. The old religious “obligation” is felt less and less. Accounting for the effects of globalization, of migration, and particularly of the role of Islam, for Davie, it is unlikely that Europe will remain a “model” in religious matters for other continents. The trend seems more likely to go in the opposite direction.153 (4) A missiology for the European context must imperatively attend to global movements of the “religious.” It cannot isolate its research from general globalization and its specific effects on Europe. The theory of secularization is valid in approaching European phenomena as selffulfilling prophecies. All theories of sociology of religions remind us of their eminently contextual character. The positivism of the enlighteners underlying the theory of secularization should in no case oppose modernity to religion. This typically European “belief” already can no longer understand religious elements of the world today without speaking of the Europe of tomorrow. Modernity can be “religious,” as numerous global contexts demonstrate. As previous sections have shown, the future of religions in Europe is more influenced by global trends than by an internal dynamic. A New Age of Reason The three following philosophical characteristics extend the reflection of the section “Inconsistencies of Modernity” in analyzing the heritage of modernity. If modernity was witness to the divorce of faith and reason—with reason being the undeniably more certain means for shoring up knowledge of humanity and the world—the new ultramodern context no longer allows reason such hegemony. Other modes of knowing are taken into account; a new use of reason is demanded. Why this change in the position, use, status, and relationships of reason? Historically speaking, “faith” had to recognize its limits in light of abuses and fanaticisms which have sown violence and war. “Pure reason,” which hoped to rid itself of religious obscurantism, then had to deplore its own victims, thus implicitly recognizing its own deficiencies. Today, “reason” and “faith” must both recognize their limits. The two great currents of Western human history have not held their own promises and are henceforth condemned to increased humility. We will now discuss the limits of reason, before explaining the necessity of a transcendence for postmodern society. Finally, we will lay out the demands of a new age of reason.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 157

25-09-2021 09:26:45

158

Chapter 3

The Limits of Reason (a) According to Paul Valadier, rationalism is jeopardized by its own illusions. He lists four aspects: Westerners at the dawn of the new millennium no longer trust in ideologies; the historical failure of practically all ideologies cuts the ground from under the feet of any idealism which promises a better world. The fall of communism, but also the cynicism of an all-out liberalism, discredit any new ideological temptations. Practical intelligence would thus have rid us of a great many problems. Yet, the eradication of evil took a serious blow in light of contemporary historical dramas which have unfolded in the very heart of the West (e.g., in former Yugoslavia). Some of the scourges of our planet have disappeared, but other plagues have surged. Optimism generated by rationalism no longer sustains a naïve attitude toward progress, which henceforth shows two faces: its success for the good of humanity, or humanity’s own annihilation. “The myth of progress” is unmasked. This demystification also throws its shadow on one of the essential factors of progress: science.154 (b) The positivism proffered by some protagonists of rationalism is increasingly difficult to defend. The work of Michaël Polanyi, a chemistry professor who migrated to the humanities, is an example of this doubt of positivism. For Polanyi, all knowledge is tacit, that is, the result of an implicit, immediate knowledge that humanity accepts without questioning. Polanyi distinguishes tacit knowledge from explicit knowledge, which is founded on the difference between subsidiary awareness (the various elements of knowledge) and focal awareness (a synthesis of the elements of subsidiary awareness, uniting them into a coherent system). Man is aware of the focal point, but he is not necessarily aware of the subsidiaries, since these two levels of awareness are separate from one another. Thus, the focal point is not the product of the logic of subsidiary awareness. According to the Hungarian savant, it is a real entity. Since the relation between focal awareness and knowledge is not automatic, human intervention is necessary. The knowing subject plays a first-order role in establishing a relation between the two levels of awareness. The subject’s leading role originates in the tacit dimension of all knowledge. Knowledge is not only accessible by explicit reason; man must trust his knowledge, which implies his responsibility. Polanyi thus rejects the ideal of scientific detachment in favor of understanding as a responsible commitment which claims universal validity. Objectivity is not abandoned, however, since the Polanyian process constructs a bridge with a hidden reality. Human implication in the constitution of knowledge is inherent to the process itself. It also allows for a rapprochement of scientific knowledge and religious

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 158

25-09-2021 09:26:45

Contextual Characteristics

159

faith since both paths to knowledge are preceded by a kind of “faith.” This “belief” anticipates all scientific innovation. But Polanyi is aware that the imminent place of subjectivism of man in his scientific process opens the door to relativism. He is aware that tacit knowledge is not critical. It is inscribed within circular argumentation and remains fallible. But here too he permits parallels with “faith.” The scientific process as the logic of “faith” contains an element of risk and incertitude. This risk-taking is inevitable, all the more as we will never have absolute proofs of truth. This absolute truth exists, but we cannot reach it by reason alone. Polanyi invites humanity to take up its responsibility confronted with the tacit dimension of knowledge, and to underpin it as much as possible with “subsidiary proofs.” To counter the temptation of relativism, which is unacceptable for the natural sciences, he calls upon external reality which exists independently of man. Knowledge seeks access to this reality via empirical analysis, but it is always mediated by the personal human element. Polanyi describes this personal element as a fundamental conviction of “divine” grace which guarantees access to reality. The result of this process will be tested and accepted by a multitude of other researchers, which guarantees some objectivity. Polanyi demonstrates that all scientific processes commit the researcher and that all humans are moved by a tacit dimension which we cannot disqualify in advance.155 (c) Each thinking subject can assimilate awareness through their mind. This process leads to the growth of knowledge. This maxim of modern science is no longer within reach for all people today, by the simple fact of the incredible accumulation of knowledge. Bertrand Saint-Sernin studies the development of new knowledge and proposes a new human-reason relation.156 Starting with the observation that one person alone is unable to conduct a wide-ranging scientific project, and thinking of the paradox that despite the homogeneous distribution of talented persons on the earth, there are very few innovative scientific hubs (and those which exist are unequally distributed), he reflected on the necessary adaptation of our rationality. Before presenting his propositions in a later section, we limit ourselves here to these three historical observations which oppose the Cartesian maxim. a.) Contrary to accepted knowledge, Saint-Sernin highlights the determining role of religion as a source of modern rationalism. Scriptures and the sciences have always remained in contact. b.) Scientific cosmology rests on traditional cosmologies. These latter exhibited a preliminary “religious” which “fumbled” or “groped at” the subject of the unity of the universe, of representations anticipating human questions which science would approach positively much

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 159

25-09-2021 09:26:46

160

Chapter 3

later. But the human quest for an overall rational explanation of the universe continues to mobilize minds. c.) The places of creativity par excellence are all built upon a community of persons from whom commitment, solidarity, and a consequent spiritual life are required. The limits of our current rationalism become clear in the light of SaintSernin’s analysis: human reason cannot cut itself off from other “knowledges” without depriving itself of fertile resources. A purely scientific cosmology cannot explain all reality, and isolated individual reason cannot attain the same creativity produced by a community. The Necessity of Transcendence (a) Secularized civilizations and human reason cannot be deprived of metaphysical considerations for various reasons and in different places. First of all, the question of “pre-political sources” of the state is posed. The philosopher Jürgen Habermas thinks that the construction of the legitimacy of a liberal state rests on legality (the constitution of a country). He follows the thought of Kant and the latter’s demand for rational autonomous acceptance of this law by citizens.157 Kant thus sweeps aside any religious and moral contributions, which certainly existed or were determining, to address a current deficit of legitimacy. By contrast, Habermas agrees that a democracy thrives through the political virtues of its citizens and that the state is clearly inserted within a civil society which is nourished by “pre-political” values. For Habermas, it seems obvious that the state of law should value the protection of the cultural sources through which citizens’ solidarity and norms are irrigated. Habermas explicitly cites religions as one of these cultural sources. In this view, the spiritual life of religious communities has retained something lost elsewhere; for example, a sensitivity to the fragility of life. In this sense, philosophy—and we include rationality therein—should learn from “religion” according to Habermas. He goes further still, stating that the neutrality of the state in religious matters has nothing in common with a political generalization of a philosophy of secularization. On the contrary, “secularized” citizens have no right to deny the veracity of a religious ideology of “believing” citizens. A liberal culture could even hope for efforts at “translation” from religious language into a public language accessible to “secularized” citizens.158 (b) The constitution of the state is a constant norm, but common law changes. These mutations are founded on the legitimacy of majority rule in a democracy. Yet a parliamentary or citizen majority can also declare

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 160

25-09-2021 09:26:46

Contextual Characteristics

161

a law “unjust.”159 This is where morality nourished by values derived from a rational autonomy intervenes on the one hand, but also other philosophical, ideological, and religious traditions on the other. Morality and transcendence are indispensable to reason.160 The existence of human rights as an immutable norm could be justified by internal (and thus rational) evidence. But this evidence poses other philosophical questions: the universality of human rights is questioned by other non-Western cultures. The historical birthplace of these rights is tied to a certain culture with a certain moral inheritance. In light of its autonomy, neo-Kantian confidence in reason seems to generate future perspectives, while the relation to revelation of religions favors a retrospective vision. Burning ethical questions such as genetic manipulation should be the ideal location for such a Kantian approach. But reality shows the opposite: the immense possibilities of this technique terrify a purely Kantian approach into an openness toward metaphysics, since this very technique operates at the limits of life and death and only augments the acuity of the ancient question of the just and good life. Reason’s self-constitution according to Kant thus finds its limits and calls upon a non-secularized and religious ethic. Current ethics already demonstrates this: a religious approach is not indispensable in the era of post-metaphysical reflection. Despite this observation, men invoke it due to lingering uncertainty in an existence motivated by rational autonomy. This says a lot about the Kantian project’s future prospects. Will it manage to produce sufficient motivation and moral strength to maintain the ideals and coherence of society? Will it generate sufficient hope to believe in the future?161 A New Relation between “Faith” and “Reason” Recognition of the limits of each means of accessing knowledge should render humans more perspicacious and less pretentious in judging their real possibilities. Both “religion” and “reason” have gone through times of glory and of humiliation. Whence the first consequence derived from the lessons of history: philosophy (or reason), as Habermas proposes, and religion can develop an attitude of mutual respect and learning from one another.162 Ratzinger demands nothing else in speaking of a correlation between faith and reason, both called to a reciprocal purification and dependence.163 Additionally, the duties of each party are different: for “faith,” the goal is not to “bring reason to despair,” but to stimulate it in its own proper work. But “religion” will also integrate it as one of the processes in its “religious” system. Its content must be explicable via an internal logic, if it is not evident through common human observation.164 On the side of “reason,” the task of breaking down the barriers isolating it from the contributions of religions must be carefully supervised.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 161

25-09-2021 09:26:46

162

Chapter 3

The “tacit dimension” (Polanyi) which moves humanity—which is not necessarily irrational—must be accounted for, along with the immanent place of man himself in his quest for truth. “Faith” can thus precede knowledge, as Augustine affirms: “If you do not first believe, you cannot understand” (nisi credideritis, non intelligetis).165 A new age of reason in postmodernity can spot the rapprochement of these two poles in a fruitful tension without succumbing to the dream of their fusion. This rapprochement could be justified by the old Christian doctrine of the inseparability of body and soul (this justification can also be formulated through a general anthropological approach) and the notion of the mystical body. Beyond these considerations, it simply becomes an unavoidable requirement confronted with planetary scientific challenges which could not be addressed without considerable intersubjective effort.166 A missiology for the Western world will perfectly discern the joyful times and painful separations of the two poles of human knowledge, proposing a new appeased and constructive relationship. In this new context, “reason” could transform from a sworn enemy into a consenting partner of “faith.” A New Apologetic Can we still propose a new apologetic of the Christian faith in a post-Christian European context? Is not such a proposition a contradiction in itself? How can we claim to ideologically “defend” anything if the subject of Christian apologetics seems weakened or discredited, and if the addressee of their message would prefer neither to receive nor admit the very existence of an integrated narrative? The project is all the more complicated as theology is suspicious of such an undertaking for various reasons, of which the most fundamental is that the all-powerful god needs no defender. Beyond a destructive and outmoded public apologetic or a constructive defense purely internal to theology, is there still space for a “new” apologetic for our civilization and our time? Posing the question gives the response. Below we briefly evoke several apologetic approaches, examining their current pertinence. “Proofs” of God Classic ontological, cosmological, teleological, kinetic, causal, and metaphysical “proofs” of God have been discredited by philosophy since Hume and Nietzsche as ill-fitted to the new reductionist methodological framework of the sciences.167 Arguments in favor of “proofs” presuppose that truth exists and that the world possesses structures accessible to reason. But for Nietzsche, truth is an illusion. Moreover, the notion of “proof” no longer seems to correspond to a theological object. The definition and status of “proof” require

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 162

25-09-2021 09:26:47

Contextual Characteristics

163

explanation and precision. This discussion of the adequate term already took place in the Middle Ages, notably by Thomas Aquinas, who cast doubt on the Anselmian terminology of the proof. In our days, discussions instead concern “evidences,” “arguments,” and “traces of God,” to avoid a collision between theological requirements and philosophical rigor. And yet such affirmations find few echoes, since the rejection of the postulate of truth also evacuates the idea of reality. But can we speak and think without allowing for a “reality”? The German philosopher Robert Spaemann contests this philosophical option, proposing his “proof” of God.168 Spaemann affirms that our way of living is bound to time and the awareness that our thought took place (in the past) or takes place (presently) or will take place (in the future). The future anterior is always linked to the present time. Everything which now is was once future and will later belong to the past. To say that a present event will not exist afterward signifies affirming that in reality, it does not exist. In this sense, for Spaemann, everything which is real is eternal. The past is always the past of a present event. We cannot “escape” the future anterior. This observation implies a “place” where everything which was in the past is set “aside and left.” That is, unless one follows the absurd reflection according to which the present event corresponds to an illusion. Spaemann concludes that whoever wants to think “reality” as true must also affirm the existence of God. Will “proofs” of God find an important place in philosophical arguments over the existence of God because of their foundation on reason as having partial access to revelation about God? We highlighted the importance of reason for religion in the postmodern context in the preceding section. The call to reason could reproduce some certainties which disappeared in the “nebula” of beliefs. Christian faith could become pertinent once more in light of the coherence and evidence of the existence of god. Blaise Pascal Pascal remains unavoidable in apologetics. But his approach is only indirectly rational.169 Pascal distinguishes his thought from metaphysical proofs of God. For him, these arguments lack efficacity in the eyes of those they address. They cannot bring people to a full knowledge of the true God. They miss their target because such a “metaphysical” God does not correspond to the living God. The true God cannot be found by reason (on the level of the mind), but by love (on the level of the heart, which designates the entirety of man). The Pascalian conception “exchanges” the “metaphysical God” for the God of charity. For Pascal, the “proof” of the being of God is of a historical and moral nature. It can only take the form of interpreting signs from God to awaken the love of man for God. Why does God remain only partially

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 163

25-09-2021 09:26:47

164

Chapter 3

accessible to human reason? Pascal affirms that God partly and voluntarily hides himself for those who do not want to know him, but also that he allows himself to be found by those who truly seek him. This uncertainty, which results from the fact that God hides himself, factors into the famous argument of the wager.170 If we could prove the reality of God, there would be no uncertainty. Since this is not the case, we must “bet” on the probability of this existence. Thus the idea of Pascal’s wager is born: the existence of God is not demonstrable for certain, but we can at least wager on his probable being. The focal point of the argument from reason is displaced from the content of ideas about God to the probability of his existence. According to the gambler’s logic, it is less risky to believe in God’s existence than to deny it. The efficacity of the argument of the wager should turn the heart of man toward this God who hides himself. It then becomes null, since the one seeking God can rely on the certitude coming from their heart. The Pascalian apologetic pursues the goal of sensitizing the soul to the signs of God, combating human indifference toward God, and preparing humans for conversion. Jean-Claude Eslin no longer really believes in the pertinence of this apologetic because our lived context has changed, and because Pascal does not manage to surmount his “hateful self,” a conception which could never inspire the necessary confidence currently in deficit in French society.171 And yet, the “existential” character of Pascal’s apologetic, its call to the heart of man alongside the place of reason, his impetuous style and struggle against indifference toward God—could not these elements correspond to a postmodern culture seeking authenticity, holism (i.e., a strong link between the heart and reason), and certainty? Philosophical Pragmatism Philosophical pragmatism is situated in opposition to both the classical “proofs” of God and a Pascal-style approach. This philosophical school was born at the end of the nineteenth century and is distinguished from idealism and rationalism. According to pragmatism, the role of reason consists only in organizing practical life through cultural efforts. Reason is limited and cannot attain awareness of being, nor “reality.” The question of truth is inappropriate because of this limit, all the more since for Nietzsche, the question is no longer asked; the very idea is illusory. Richard Rorty puts it thus: There would only be a “higher” aim of inquiry called “truth” if there were such a thing as ultimate justification—justification before God, or before the tribunal or reason, as opposed to any merely finite human audience.172

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 164

25-09-2021 09:26:47

Contextual Characteristics

165

Such a “tribunal” does not exist according to our neo-pragmatist. The American philosopher (deceased in 2007) replaced knowledge with the hope of a “better” future. Hope feeds on any beliefs, which cannot be judged by their content but by their effects on hope. The question of the existence of God only has a practical application: can we construct a “better world” through this message or some other religion? Reference to the authority of God or a metaphysical reality would be only a rhetorical gesture unrelated to their content. In other words, Rorty detects no relation between cohesion and existence. Pragmatism accepts an existence which remains ambivalent on the question of God: it allows for a discourse on God to the extent that it can to produce a “better future” on the one hand, and it bars the way for those who would want to appropriate a “true” God on the other. Pragmatism opens the horizon toward the future through its futureconstitutive perspective, but neither this future nor the means for attaining it can be defined due to the lack of a minimal notion of truth.173 It offers apologetics an approach to God without taboo or prejudice. This is an argument for the Westerner who finds herself opposed or indifferent to religions. Metanarratives are measured by their “positive” effects in the world, which opens the possibility of attraction to them, moving toward adherence. But these partial potentialities are situated on shifting ground. Inaccessibility of truth or its non-existence, relativism—sooner or later, these notions inherent to this philosophy will probably weaken efforts to construct such an apologetic. The Contribution of Anthropology A renewal of apologetics in postmodernity is also offered by anthropology, which corresponds to the nodal point of the divorce between Christianity and modernity. In his contribution, Yves Ledure undertakes a rereading of this history of splits.174 Since the Enlightenment, man and his autonomy have been at the center of our culture. According to Ledure, the Christianity of the era fell back on metaphysics, thus pursuing the Greek tradition of its theology, and opposing the new anthropocentrism. Breaking with any reference to God, the philosophers of modernity thus enclosed humanity in the determinism of nature. Ledure calls both traditions to a “mutual conversion” and purification of their excesses.175 The theological contraction of Christianity should never have taken place since scripture furnishes various materials which instead allow for the establishment of a strong anthropological message capable of reaching the man of modernity. Notions developed by Ledure include the incarnation of God in his son Jesus, the order of faith, and the message of freedom. With anthropology thus resourced, Ledure hopes that humanity might grasp the concept of God once again. Ledure is one voice

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 165

25-09-2021 09:26:48

166

Chapter 3

among others such as Simone Weil or René Girard who point to the anthropological pertinence of scripture.176 Opportunities Presented by Postmodernity The denial of all pertinence of Christian discourse in postmodernity might also be inverted for obvious reasons in positive argument: the historical and philosophical conditions of postmodernity allow precisely for an appropriation of the Christian message. For example, this view is held by Gianni Vattimo. Vattimo retraces the declarations of the death of God by Friedrich Nietzsche and of the end of metaphysics by Martin Heidegger. These two affirmations do not unveil an atheism, properly speaking; otherwise they would have anchored their negation in a metaphysical structure of thought. According to Vattimo, the two philosophers only want to highlight the non-existence of an ultimate foundation (for Nietzsche) and to defend the experience of freedom (for Heidegger). Vattimo seizes this specification as an opportunity to construct his discourse on God in postmodernity: because the existence of a God as ultimate metaphysical foundation can no longer be postulated today, the option of faith in God is possible. The Italian philosopher introduces a distinction between God as a construction of scholastic metaphysical philosophy and the real God of the Bible. If God were truly dead because he is unable to be grasped by philosophy, philosophical atheism should also “die.” Liberated from the absolute affirmations of philosophical schools, postmodern man can no longer think himself as eternal; ultimate structures have disappeared. But he can henceforth hear the biblical notions of creation and historicity of his existence. Vattimo translates these remarks into philosophical terms: It is above all because of the experience of postmodern pluralism that we can think of Being only as event, and of truth not as the reflection of reality’s eternal structure but rather as a historical message that must be heard and to which we are called to respond.177

Vattimo expands this reflection on theology to cover most sciences, exposing the historicity of their scientific paradigms. If the definition of postmodern truth was linked to a transmission of messages, these messages would have to be decoded via “historical languages.” The Bible offers us just such a historical message. In this sense Vattimo pleads for its pertinence: it informs our Western spirit like no other book. The reflections of the Italian philosopher provide us with the possibility of a renewed apologetic. In this unique historical condition, we probably would not use the expression “apologetics” because in postmodernity there is nothing left to “defend.” But there is a new space for speaking a word which is borne out in history.178

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 166

25-09-2021 09:26:48

Contextual Characteristics

167

The Appropriate “Style” We now leave aside the content of apologetics to reflect on the appropriate style for a post-metaphysical apologetic. In this domain, it seems that continuity is called for, a renewal which draws its sources from the beginning of apologetic history—that is, the New Testament witness (martus). Since the people of postmodernity link truth to a message, a narrative discourse (testimony) seems to be efficacious once again. The witness always speaks from their own subjective perspective, in the first person singular. The pluralism of possible discourses is thus assumed. The witness’s life, her reflection, and her rational arguments are then added to historical testimonies of the biblical message. This informed correlation would emit a surplus of truth available for a “new” apologetic. We might cite three current examples (all non-theologians) who have chosen precisely this style of testimony: Jacques Ellul, Gianni Vattimo, and Jean-Claude Guillebaud.179 Vattimo esteems that this literary genre is the only one appropriate to religious discourse.180 The Domination of Aesthetics and Ethics The upsurge of images to the detriment of the word, the imposition of cyberspace alongside a visible “reality” for all, and the acuity of ethical questions posed to representatives of religions in the postmodern era mark the end of an evolution. What counts in the Western culture today is the layout of the stage, the layout of the page, and the “putting into words” (communication which replaces information).181 This present domination of the aesthetic and the ethical as a characteristic of our time results from the progressive cloistering away of these various domains (aesthetics, ethics, and word or religious discourse), moving toward their total autonomy. The confinement of “values” in private space and “facts” in public space (a phenomenon described above) constitutes this evolution’s descriptive schema par excellence. At the end of this process, the whole of the sensate domain bears on ethics, but also on “reason” and the “word.” Its most advanced expression seems to be the constitution of a cyberspace which is both “ultra-realistic” and completely imaginary. A missiology for the Western world will aim to re-appropriate “reality,” to end the isolation of the spheres evoked, and to reunite them.182 We will first define aesthetics, then propose three different perspectives connecting these separate domains, before finally approaching virtual space as presented on the internet as an omnipresent aesthetic expression of our time. Defining Aesthetics As the “science of beauty,” aesthetics defines its object in contrast to “ugliness,” and more particularly enquires into the meaning of art. Though it only

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 167

25-09-2021 09:26:48

168

Chapter 3

became a philosophical discipline in the eighteenth century, certain ideas in this field were explored earlier—for example, in Plato (whose ontological aesthetic was based on the “beauty” of the idea), in Aristotle’s idea of the transformative effect of drama on emotion, and in Plotinus, who identified being as such and in its totality with the idea of “the beautiful.” Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten (1714–1762) first coined the term aesthetics, referring to the science of sensible knowledge. His attempt to create a space for “the beautiful” was nevertheless influenced by classical rationalism: art must copy nature. Paradoxically, Emmanuel Kant (1724–1804) gave aesthetics its status within, then outside philosophy. For him, aesthetics bore a special status as “first philosophy,” a consecration which simultaneously enabled it to be treated separately. The German philosophical movement which formed aesthetic notions corresponded with a poetic movement (Winckelmann, Klopstock, Lessing, Hamann, Herder, Goethe, Schiller). The synthesis of both currents in the early nineteenth century was the origin of German idealism’s metaphysical aesthetics. Since then, various scientific disciplines have applied the science of “sensible knowledge.” Friedrich Nietzsche’s nihilism (1844–1900) marked the end of unity between the “beautiful” and the “good.” To this day, aesthetics is still marked by the difficulty of creating a consensus of its theory.183 The three “paths” which we will present are only cited as examples of possible links between aesthetics, ethics, and the word (or religion, or faith). Once this relation is demonstrated, it will permit their isolation to be overcome and will indicate the necessity of their unity, if only for their survival. Each “path” is inscribed in one of the starting points of its perspective: philosophical, theological, and iconographic points of departure. A European missiology which makes use of this accumulated material will take part in breaking down the partitions between the three spheres, in the re-appropriation of “reality,” and in the rebuilding of the initial link between them, all from a theological foundation. Søren Kierkegaard The name of Søren A. Kierkegaard (1813–1855) is associated with a subjective philosophical approach. According to this philosopher, we should traverse three stages of life until we are able to say “I”—that is, to affirm our individual existence. The Dane illustrates each of these steps via a representative person. The first stage is aesthetic: a life lived in the immediacy of sentiments without reflective effort. Life is directed by desire, which gives birth to new passions. But the aesthete will necessarily be led toward dissatisfaction, melancholy, and malaise. Don Juan is the representative of this first stage. The ethicist (second stage) goes beyond the sensual

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 168

25-09-2021 09:26:49

Contextual Characteristics

169

and momentary, inscribing himself in time and the tasks he must accomplish. The notion of freedom, which is inherent to this step, allows “Judge William” to engage in various life projects. Wilhelm is the representative of the ethical stage: he incarnates the faithful husband, the serious citizen who obeys the law vigorously and rigorously. The ethicist is the man of will and choice who aims to abandon superficiality in favor of being inscribed in eternity. To arrive at the final “religious” stage, Kierkegaard advises a “decisive leap”—a leap of “faith”—since one must enter a paradoxical world, leaving reason and wisdom behind. This stage is represented by Abraham, the “knight of faith.” The man who braves the step into the abyss will lose everything. But everything will be given back to him. The existence lived in this “religious” stage remains under the stamp of this complete loss and this complete gain: it contains both despair and victory. At this stage, substitution is no longer possible. I can no longer explain this “faith,” but I must exert myself to live its authenticity. I stand alone before God and solitary among men.184 Hans Urs von Balthasar We now move from the philosophical perspective185 to the theological perspective, from Kierkegaard’s three stages of existence (aesthetic, ethical, and religious) to the theological trilogy (aesthetic, ethical, logical) of Hans Urs von Balthasar (1905–1988). His theology is founded on the transcendental properties of being: the beautiful, the good, and the true. The Swiss theologian develops a theological aesthetics which, with its dimension of the “beautiful,” completes the other two more conventional aspects of theological work (the “true” and the “good”). Von Balthasar constructs his monumental work in fifteen volumes: he begins with aesthetics (the pulchrum),186 followed by ethics (the bonum),187 concluding with logic (the verum).188 The “in-itself” of the revelation of God is the center of his reflection and the point of departure for his aesthetic approach. The revelation of God is “beautiful” in itself. Its irradiation via the figure of Christ allows for its perception and the construction of a veritable theological aesthetics. Aesthetic criteria depend on revelation; they are given by it and take on a truly theological character. This aesthetic is thus distinguished from a simple aesthetic theology. This latter promotes the construction of an aesthetic theology or Christianity at the risk of separating it from its objects—that is, separating God and the world. For Von Balthasar, the task of aesthetics is situated in the perception of the truth of the revelation which we encounter in the figure of Christ. To perceive signifies to grasp the true and the totality through its structure.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 169

25-09-2021 09:26:49

170

Chapter 3

In the second part of his trilogy, Von Balthasar turns from vision to action, from theological aesthetics to Theo-Drama. Drama represents God’s acting in the world, to which man responds through action. In the final part, Theo-Logic, the theologian concludes on the manner in which God reveals himself. This “logic” is deployed by the incarnate Logos, the interpreter of the truth of the Father. Von Balthasar’s concept forms an integrative system which contradicts all compartmentalization of properties of being. His theological aesthetics, which begin with the “in-itself” (in sich selbst) of divine revelation, ought not to be confused with modern philosophical aesthetics. The three stages of existence in Kierkegaard are inseparable, like the three theological sectors in Von Balthasar. Anthropological and theological perspectives intertwine in both approaches. For Kierkegaard, one must go beyond the aesthetic stage; the in-itself beauty of God is the starting point for Von Balthasar. Both authors affirm that aesthetics cannot close in on itself based on different perspectives. Hans Belting As art is the heart of the aesthetic question, we have chosen the little-known art historian Hans Belting as an iconographic reference. For roughly a decade, this contemporary thinker has announced the end of art history because the notion of “art” is an historic construction. Belting has little concern for the ontology of the image, focusing rather on the human being’s relation to it: why do people create images, and why do they place their “confidence” in them? In his most recent work, Belting explains why the ancient debates on the legitimacy and illegitimacy of the image, fights over the representation of Christ, and polemics around idolatry and iconoclasm are still relevant, even today in our so-called “post-Christian” culture. The question of the “true image” in which we desire to believe is still posed. Belting evokes photography as an example. Through its technical performance which guarantees its veracity, this representation promises a response to the question of the “true image.” Having “shown” the authenticity of the picture, the image shows us the “truth.” We choose photos which correspond to these criteria, always seeking “proofs” which we would like to see. For Belting, the “true image” is thus a synonym of “reality.” But this latter is constantly undergoing changes in its definition which also modify what we ask of images. Man thus wants “to believe” images, but images must in turn justify our “faith” in them. Hiding behind the technological advances in photography is a search for the “true image.” Belting’s discourse is surprising because since romanticism, religion and art have taken separate paths. Despite this separation, a deep religious undercurrent continues to influence our view of the image. According

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 170

25-09-2021 09:26:50

Contextual Characteristics

171

to Belting, modern art, having arrived at the apogee of autonomous aesthetics, would thus continually refer back to the “belief” of its observer. The indissoluble link between aesthetics and religion/faith seems to confirm the impossibility of their isolation, as in the two preceding approaches.189 The image requires “belief” (Belting). Aesthetic objects call for ethical response and reflection on the “true” (Von Balthasar) or a “leap” into the “religious” (Kierkegaard). Virtual Space A final ultimately aesthetic expression which is taking on a growing place in daily human lives is the virtual space in gaming programs and on the internet.190 This space exists above all in gaming programs. These programs make artificial objects, landscapes and persons which strongly reassemble reality. But the player or players are in artificial space, despite their interaction with a world which seems so real. This virtual space corresponds to an illusion created by software. It also exists via the internet, which gives the impression of human proximity in spite of physical separation. Software and communication via the internet conjointly and paradoxically open up opportunities for new exchanges and proximity between humans, but also a transformation of “real” into artificial human life. The information era seems a major cultural shift, similar in scale to industrialization, for example. Its possibilities cohere with aesthetics and its power of illusion. This “liaison” seems to be selfcontradictory; did not modernity hope to rid itself of all immaterial utopia, precisely to stay within “real” space? Highly developed societies have thus allowed for a digital revolution leading directly to the creation of a virtual space. The isolation of aesthetics and its domination of the cultural landscape of our time, particularly tangible in mass media, meets the needs of human beings in postmodernity. A relation still qualified as contradictory under modernity becomes banalized in the following era: the technical prowess of gaming programs seamlessly unites with ultimate aesthetic needs. Another binomial “virtual space—religion” can be added to this “couple.” Here again, informatic knowledge serves a human need, since only one step separates the virtual from religion. The utopia generated by virtual space can very easily link to the idea of the transcendence of a religion. The reality of the “canvas” confirms this fact. The internet is not merely a tool; it can also produce a connection between the imagination of the internaut and a “religion,” or become a pillar of a new “religion.” The Australian journalist Margaret Wertheim has written a history of spaces and postulates that virtual space is a technological temptation to build a substitute for “Christian heaven.”191 Without going quite that far, we can say that the digital phenomenon proves that the dominant aesthetic of our society can quite easily latch onto a new religious expression.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 171

25-09-2021 09:26:50

172

Chapter 3

The uncrossable distance between domains as different as virtual space and the “religious” sphere seems to suddenly disappear in postmodernity. In this section, we have seen that the domination of aesthetics is only apparent. It is evidently tied to utopia, to “religion,” to diffuse belief, to “faith,” but sooner or later it encounters the ethical. CONCLUSION Our overview focused on the religious and cultural situation of Europe is in no way complete. We must now synthesize and sort these characteristics, retaining the essential and deducing criteria from them which will necessarily factor into a future missiology for Europe, giving content to the “context” pole. The seventeen characteristics retained by the three missiologists or by ourselves spring from different places and scientific methods; we gather them here according to their place. (1) The first three characteristics (“Mission, a Taboo to Break,” “A New Language to Create,” and “The Imperative of a New Contextualization”) can be situated in the prolegomena or pre-conditions of a European missiology. Historical, philosophical, theological and cultural reasons have constructed a specific taboo around “mission” in Europe. These reasons ought to be illuminated one by one and submitted to critical theological analysis to allow for a healthy and new approach to this theological notion. Learning an adequate “religious” language, and perhaps even creating new languages are precursors for all missionary work. Without this tool, no proclamation of the Good News is possible; words are lacking. This learning can partially draw on the rich vocabulary of Christian history in Europe. But this vocabulary must also be partially replaced by new creations of terms and notions which satisfy the requirement of a new contextualization of the evangelical message. The imperative of a renewed contextualization underlies our entire work. But the evidence of this missiological need has not necessarily been recognized by theologians or churches in Europe. (2) Four empirical characteristics derived from the sociology of religions critically accompany the results of this approach in chapter 2. The section “An Impossible Unbelief” leads directly to the observation of the erosion of Christianity on the Continent. But this fact is counterbalanced: this phenomenon also affects ideologies and the “religious” which might be reconstructed differently. According to the chosen definition, “religion” could be found in nearly all strata of society, even in modern Europe. A

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 172

25-09-2021 09:26:51

Contextual Characteristics

173

fundamental critique of the sociology of religions was laid out in the sections “Transcendence in the Sociology of Religions” and “Social Reality in the Sociology of Religions.” The evacuation of the notion of transcendence and the introduction of another, newer notion of “reality” by this discipline includes a risk of missing its object of study, uniformizing opposed phenomena, de-realizing “reality,” and dispossessing persons of their discourse. The analysis of the non-religiosity and of alternative beliefs of numerous Europeans (which generally are not included in the “religious” domain) can cast doubt on the disappearance of the “religious” (or in any case of “belief”), as discussed in the section “Persons Without Religion” and Alternative Beliefs.” The persistence of this phenomenon in ultramodernity can put the paradigms of the “disappearance” of the “religious” in doubt and should raise questions about a possible constitutive anthropological relationship between humans and “religion.” A satisfactory definition of “religions” is still beyond our reach. (3) Among the four philosophical characteristics, we have tried to find openings in the two Western dichotomies: fact and proof; public and private space (“Inconsistencies of Modernity”), to propose a new relationship between faith and reason (“A New Age of Reason”), to probe the possibilities of a new Christian discourse in postmodernity (“A New Apologetics”), and to demonstrate the profound connections between aesthetics, ethics, and the word confronted with an apparent compartmentalization of these spheres (“The Domination of Aesthetics and Ethics”). (4) Four demographic and geographical characteristics demonstrate that these brute facts weigh heavily on the religious situation in Europe. The composition and dynamism of global Christianity, the migratory fluxes and birth rates, the place and role of Islam in Europe, and the mutual influence between our continent and others in religious matters are factors which already transform our culture. These transformations will be accelerated and deepened in coming decades. (5) A recourse to practical theology goes beyond the framework of sociology of religions and theology, drawing as close as possible to singular phenomena of life. These phenomena can be “religious.” Empirical theology is a stinging reminder to other (ontological, historical, critical, speculative) theological approaches of the importance of facts. One of the most noble tasks of theology is found in the treatment of “reality.” (6) The historical characteristic adds a specificity and complexity to a model of contextualization in Europe. It is particular because this is not the first contextualization of the Gospel here. Several “layers” of formal and primarily informal contextualization have forged the Christianity which constitutes a part of the European heritage. Even if we have sought a

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 173

25-09-2021 09:26:51

174

Chapter 3

model of contextualization which breaks with this legacy, we cannot simply abstract away from historical continuity. These two demands establish the particular complexity of our undertaking. These six groups of seventeen characteristics bring out several contextual criteria (see figure 3.1). A contextual theology for Europe must necessarily retain the following general criteria which constitute the “context” pole in our model of contextualization (see the table on the following page): ( 1) the criterion of preconditions; (2) the Geographical and demographic criterion; (3) the empirical criterion with its various and divergent approaches (sociology of religions, empirical theology); (4) the historical criterion; and (5) the philosophical criterion. The “context” pole of our model is thus constituted. We now turn to the theology which will develop its own criteria in response to the “context.” 

CONTEXTUAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE THREE MISSIOLOGISTS Mission—a Taboo to Break (*) A New Language to Create (*) The Imperative of a New Contextualization (*) Inconsistencies of Modernity (#) An Impossible Unbelief (§) Christians from the South in the West (+) OTHER CONTEXTUAL CHARACTERISTICS Transcendance in Sociology of Religions (§) Social Reality in the Sociology of Religions (§) Persons “Without Religion” and Alternative Beliefs (§) An “Empirical Theology” (§) The Legacy of Christianization (¤) Demography and Migration (+) Islam in Europe (+) Model or exception? (+) A New Age of Reason (#) A New Apologetics (#) The Domination of Aesthetics and Ethics (#) 1) Preconditions: * 2) Geographic and demographic criteria: + 3) Empirical Criteria: § 4) Historical Criteria: ¤ 5) Philosophical Criteria: #

Figure 3.1  Synthesis of Seventeen Contextual Criteria into Five Groups.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 174

25-09-2021 09:26:52

Contextual Characteristics

175

NOTES 1. Concerning points 2 and 3, cf. Zorn, “La contextualization,” 171–172. 2. John Milbank, “Libération (Théologie de la),” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, first ed. “Quadrige,” 655–656. 3. Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral (Downers Grove: IVP, 1991), 318–338. 4. Bosch, Dynamique, 600. 5. Jacques Gadille, “Adaptation,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 15–19. 6. Achiel Peelan, Les nouveaux défis de l’inculturation (Brussells/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2007); Emilio Alberich, “Inculturer et indigéniser le christianisme,” in Routhier and Viau, Précis de théologie pratique, 453–465; Yves Labbé, “Le concept d’inculturation,” Revue des sciences religieuses 80, no. 2 (April 2006, 205–215; Jean-François Zorn, “Contextualisation,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 67–70; Philippe Chanson, “Inculturation,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie,165–170; Efoé-Julien Pénoukou, “Inculturation,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 567–570; Jean-Paul Messina (dir.), L’inculturation en débat, Journées théologiques, coll. Les publications du Conseil scientifique no. 4, Conférences théologiques n° 1; Yaoundé-Nkolbisson, 12–15 March 1996 (Yaoundé: Presses Universitaires, 1996); Klauspeter Blaser and Adriaan Geense, “Inculturation,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 720–721; Bosch, Dynamique, 565–612; Donald R. Jacobs, “Contextualization in Mission,” in Toward the Twenty-first Century in Christian Mission, dir. James M. Phillips and Robert T. Coote (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 218–234. 7. Cf. chapter 1, note [XREF]. 8. André Gounelle, “Process Theology,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 941–944. 9. Zorn, “La contextualization,” 171–189. 10. Paul Tillich, Substance catholique et principe protestant (Paris/Geneva/ Laval: Cerf/Labor et Fides/Presses de l’Université de Laval, 1996). According to Tillich, Catholic spirituality accentuates religious “substance,” which means the presence of God in certain places (the church and the sacraments). Protestant spirituality, rather, emphasizes the religious “principle” of the alterity of God. 11. This refers to the exchange of local theologies aiming at a synergy of supracultural theology. Paul G. Hiebert, “Metatheologie: Ein Schritt über die Kontextualisierung hinaus,” in Bilanz und Plan. Mission an der Schwelle zum dritten Jahrtausend, dir. Hans Kasdorf and Klaus W. Müller (Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1988), 396–400; Aylward W.F. Shorter, Toward a Theology of Inculturation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1988). 12. This implies a four-step contextualization: (1) analysis of the culture; (2) exegesis of scripture and the creation of a “hermeneutical bridge” toward the host culture; (3) critical evaluation of an existing cultural practice; and (4) the creation of a new contextualized practice. Missiologist-anthropologist Paul G. Hiebert died in March 2007. Cf. Paul G. Hiebert, Mission et culture (Saint-Légier: Emmaüs, 2002);

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 175

25-09-2021 09:26:53

176

Chapter 3

idem, Anthropological Reflections on Missiological Issues (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 75–92. 13. This analysis has been done by Walldorf for the declarations of European churches from 1979–2002. He synthesizes three models of theologies of mission: (a) the model of ecclesiocentric inculturation (“das ekklesiozentrische InkulturationsModell”) of the Roman Catholic church; (b) the synthetic cosmocentric model (“das kosmozentrisch-synthetische Modell”) of the Conference of European Churches; and (c) the model of translation centered on the scriptures (“das bibliozentrische Übersetzungs-Modell”) of the European committee of the Lausanne movement. Cf. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 306–329. 14. Our choice sets aside W.A. Visser ‘t Hooft, the first secretary general of the World Council of Churches, because his work is somewhat outdated (dating from the 1970s), as well as Jean Paul II because his writings concerning “re-evangelization” and the “new evangelization” must be situated in the domain of church declarations. 15. Jacques Nicole, “Newbigin, James Edward Lesslie (1909-),” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 1071–1072; George R. Hunsberger, “Newbigin (James Edward) Lesslie (1909–1998),” Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, 688; Lesslie Newbigin, Unfinished Agenda. An Autobiography, Genève, WCC, 1985. 16. Beyond the publications already evoked, cf. Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, coll. WCC Publications (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989; Truth to Tell. The Gospel as public Truth, coll. WCC Publications (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991). 17. J. Kevin Livingston, “The Legacy of David J. Bosch,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 23 no. 1 (Jan. 1999) 26–32. 18. Godin and Daniel, La France, pays de mission? The two priests were not the first to declare a European country to be a mission field; see Gantenbein, “La France,” 65–67. 19. Matthias Sellmann, “Einführung,” in Deutschland–Missionsland. Zur Überwindung eines pastoralen Tabus, coll. Quaestiones disputatae n. 206, dir. Matthias Sellmann (Fribourg e. B./Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2004) 9–24. 20. Wilbert R. Shenk, “The Culture of Modernity as a Missionary Challenge,” in The Good News of the Kingdom. Mission Theology of the Third Millenium, dir. Charles Van Engen et al. (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis, 1993), 193–194. 21. Markus Büker, “Europa—ohne Grenzen und ohne Mission? Zur Notwendigkeit und Chance inkulturierter Mission im deutschsprachigen Raum,” Zeitschrift für Mission 26 no. 2–3 (2000) 194–209. 22. Concerning the accusation that missionary societies entirely backed the colonial system, see Klauspeter Blaser, “Mission,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 982. 23. This term is used in the Lutheran world and synonymous with “evangelical” or “evangelization” more common in Reformed milieux. Cf. Zorn, “Mission et évangélisation,” 317–318. 24. Johannes Verkuyl, Contemporary Missiology. An Introduction (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 334–338. 25. Walter Freytag, Reden und Aufsätze, vol. 1, dir. J. Hermelink and H.-J. Margull (Munich: Kaiser, 1961), 111.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 176

25-09-2021 09:26:54

Contextual Characteristics

177

26. Biblical studies, church history, systematic theology, and practical theology. This model was imposed beginning with Schleiermacher (1768–1834). Cf. Daniel Friedrich Ernst Schleiermacher, Le statut de la théologie. Bref exposé, trad. Bernard Kaempf with Pierre Bühler (Geneva/Paris: Labor et Fides/Cerf, 1994). 27. Bosch, Dynamique, 654–658; Zorn, “De la mission comme acte de foi à l’acte théologique missiologique,” in Missiologie, 11–53; Büker, “Europa,” 199. 28. Newbigin, Foolishness, 21–41; cf. Hannah Arendt, Condition de l’homme moderne, coll. Sciences Humaines–Agora (Paris: Pocket, 1994), 1st ed., 1958. 29. Sellmann, “Einführung,” 10. 30. This tension is suggested in Neal Blough, “Pluralisme et vérité: L’Église peut-elle encore être missionnaire en Occident?” Perspectives missionnaires no. 39 (2000–1) 5–17. 31. Louis Schweitzer, dir., Conviction et dialogue. Le dialogue interreligieux (Cléon d’Andran/Vaux-sur-Seine: Excelsis/Édifac, 2000); Rutter, “Une analyse des fondements théologiques des déclarations récentes,” 230–281. 32. This thesis is also developed by Gerd Theissen, who relies on a definition of religion from George Lindbeck. Gerd Theissen, La religion des premiers chrétiens. Une théorie du christianisme primitif (Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 2002), 15–22. 33. Johann E. Hafner, “Individualisierbarkeit des Religiösen? Die Pflege religiöser Grammatik als Aufgabe einer missionarischen Kirche,” in Sellmann, Deutschland–Missionsland, 169–176. 34. Jean François Zorn, “Die Mission hat eine Vergangenheit—hat sie auch Zukunft?” Ökumenische Rundschau 43 no. 1 (Jan. 1994) 60–71. 35. Cf. Anton Wessels, Europe: Was It Ever Really Christian? The Interaction between Gospel and Culture (London: SCM, 1994). 36. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 43–44. 37. Büker, “Europa,” 195. 38. Cf. Wilbert R. Shenk’s preface in Bosch, Believing in the Future. 39. Büker, “Europa,” 198–199. 40. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 341–345. 41. Bosch, Dynamique, 475–491. 42. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 13–20. 43. Peter L. Berger, L’impératif hérétique. Les possibilités actuelles du discours religieux (Paris: Van Dieren, 2005). 44. Newbigin, Foolishness, 1–20; idem, “Can the West Be Converted?” Princeton Seminary Review 6 no. 1 (1985) 25–37. Reprinted in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research 11 no. 1 (1987) 2–7. 45. Cf. Newbigin, Foolishness, 124; Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 25. 46. Marcel Gauchet, Désenchantement du monde. Une histoire politique de la religion, coll. Bibliothèque des sciences humaines (Paris: Gallimard, 1985), 302. 47. Ibid., p. II. 48. Ibid., 292–303. 49. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 15–16, 31–33.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 177

25-09-2021 09:26:55

178

Chapter 3

50. Helmut Burkhardt, “Christlicher Glaube und Quasireligion,” in Das gute Handeln (Materialethik). Erster Teil, Ethik vol. II (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 2003), 54–59. 51. Büker, “Europa,” 195–197. This term applies not only to borrowing from exoticism, but to all such borrowing. 52. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 32. 53. Cf. Klaus Wetzel, Wo die Kirchen wachsen. Der geistliche Aufbruch in der Zwei-Drittel-Welt und die Folgen für das Christentum, coll. TVG-Orientierung (Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1998). 54. Cf. Olivier Tschannen, Les théories de la sécularisation, Genève, Droz, 1992. 55. Cf. the belief of youths in Antoine Delestre, La religion des étudiants (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997). 56. Roland Campiche et al., Les deux visages de la religion (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004). 57. In this work, we employ the enumeration of commandments according to the Reformed tradition. 58. Wetzel, Wo die Kirchen wachsen, 93–99. 59. Newbigin, Foolishness, 146. 60. Larry E. Keyes, The Last Age of Missions: A Study of Third World Mission Societies (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1983); Larry D. Pate, From Every People: A Handbook of Two-thirds World Missions (Monrovia: MARC, 1989); Gerald H. Anderson, “American Protestants in Pursuit of Mission: 1886–1986,” in Missiology. An Ecumenical Introduction, dir. F. J. Verstraelen (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 416. Cf. the critical analysis of Keyes in Klaus Fiedler, “Wo sind die 20.000? Eine kritische Analyse von Lawrence Keyes’ Konzept der ‘transkulturellen Drittweltmissionare’ und der ihm zugrundeliegenden Daten,” Evangelikale Missiologie 5 no. 3 (1989) 37–40. 61. Cf. Xavier Ternisien, “Les Églises afro-chrétiennes font de la France une terre d’évangélisation,” Le Monde, January 3, 2001. 62. We have not found another satisfactory term to designate these churches. We intend communities which often gather persons of the same ethnic origin. 63. Cf. Marc Spindler and Annie Lenoble-Bart (dirs.), Chrétiens d’Outre-mer en Europe: Un autre visage de l’immigration (Paris: Karthala, 2000); Bernard Coyault, “Les Églises issues de l’immigration dans le paysage protestant français: De la “mission en retour” à la mission commune?” Perspectives missionnaires no. 48 (2004–2) 5–21. 64. Newbigin, Foolishness, 146–148; idem, “Can the West Be Converted?” 7. 65. Hervieu-Léger, Le pèlerin, 29–32. 66. Enzo Pace, “Sociology of Religion: the State of Art,” in Revay and Tomka, Eastern European Religion, 13–31. 67. For example, see Niklas Luhmann, Die Religion der Gesellschaft (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2000). 68. See Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, La construction sociale de la réalité (Paris: Méridiens/Klincksieck, 1986). 69. Cf. the works of Danièle Hervieu-Léger, La religion pour mémoire (Paris: Cerf, 1993); Le pèlerin.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 178

25-09-2021 09:26:55

Contextual Characteristics

179

70. Shmuel Trigano, Qu’est-ce que la religion? La transcendance des sociologues, coll. Champs (Paris: Flammarion, 2001); idem, “Les torsions de la transcendance,” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 51–54. 71. This refers to the mythical experience of the totemic horde, the moment of the birth of religion. 72. Human consciousness inverts the image of the world to understand it. 73. Trigano, “Transcendance,” 51. 74. Ibid., 54. 75. Alain Caillé, “Présentation,” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 5–30. 76. Danièle Hervieu-Léger, “La religion, mode de croire,” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 144–158. 77. Trigano, “Transcendance,” 52. 78. Ibid., 54. 79. The redoubling of reality first appeared in the sociology of religions in the Durkheimian dichotomy separating sacred from profane. We could thus juxtapose the manifest reality of the sacred and the primary reality of the profane. According to Durkheim, the sacred is isolated by the taboo, and the taboo applies to the profane. Religion thus creates a distance between the two notions and extracts a supraempirical dimension from the profane. Beliefs are representations of the sacred. Religious experience is always linked to a community where it creates a group. Thus, the sacred-profane dichotomy is also linked to the society/individual dichotomy. Cf. Willaime, Sociologie des religions, 18–22. 80. Jacques Dewitte, “Croire ce que l’on croit. Réflexions sur la religion et les sciences sociales,” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 62–89. 81. Hans Jonas, The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1984. 82. Dewitte, “Croire,” 71. 83. Here Dewitte follows primarily Leszek Kolakowski, “La revanche du sacré dans la culture profane,” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 55–61 (a reprint of an article printed in 1974); idem, Philosophie de la religion (Paris: Fayard, 1985). 84. Kolakowski defines religion as “The socially established worship of eternal reality.” 85. Dewitte, “Croire,” 85. 86. This was later expanded to examine the world, becoming the World Values Study (WVS). 87. Yves Lambert, “Vers une ère post-chrétienne?” Futuribles special no. 200 (July–August 1995) 85–111; Lambert, “Europe tournant,” 134–135. 88. Miklos Tomka, “The Non-Religious,” in Revay and Tomka, Eastern European Religion, 103–120. 89. Ibid., 119–120. 90. Lambert, “Hors piste et randonnée,” 144–146. 91. “Areligious non-member,” “religious non-member,” (Tomka); “convinced atheist without religion” and “non-atheist without religion” (Lambert).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 179

25-09-2021 09:26:56

180

Chapter 3

92. Lambert, “Hors piste et randonnée,” 145. 93. Cf. Geller, “Die Kirchen in der DDR,” 320–341; Tomka, “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern,” 343–370. 94. Françoise Champion, “L’univers mystique-ésotérique et croyances parallèles,” Futuribles no. 260 (January 2001) 49–59. 95. Guy Michelat, “L’essor des croyances parallèles,” Futuribles no. 260 (January 2001) 61–72. 96. Ibid., 61. 97. Boy, “Les Français et les parasciences,” 41–42. 98. This is notable in two subheadings of Yves Lambert’s article: “La modernité comme facteur de déclin religieux” and “La modernité comme foyer d’innovations religieuses”: Yves Lambert, “Le devenir de la religion en Occident. Réflexion sociologique sur les croyances et les pratiques,” Futuribles no. 260 (January 2001) 23–38. 99. Dinter et al., Empirische Theologie, 15. 100. Ibid., 26–42. 101. The Belgian anthropologist Piette is also interested in “ordinary religion,” but he develops his own model. See Albert Piette, Le fait religieux: Une théorie de la religion ordinaire, coll. Études sociologiques (Paris: Economica, 2003). 102. Wilhelm Gräb, Leben​sgesc​hicht​en—Le​bense​ntwür​fe—Si​nndeu​tunge​n. Eine Praktische Theologie gelebter Religion, 2nd ed. (Gütsersloh: Verlagshaus/Kaiser, 2000). 103. Husserl’s phenomenology provides the foundational methodology for this school. 104. François-André Isambert, “Sécularisation,” Dictionnaire de l’Histoire du christianisme, 973–979. 105. To respond to this question, criteria of evaluation must be agreed upon. Historians, sociologists, and theologians do not agree on this subject. Our missiological work will privilege theological criteria which are proper to it, and particularly, a realist evaluation of the evangelical ideal in the life of Christians. On the one hand, we must refute a contradictory opposition between the evangelical message and the behavior of Christians; on the other, we must accept a certain distance between the message and actions. This gap corresponds to the Christian notion of sanctification: the holiness of the Christian is simultaneously the object and the goal of faith. 106. Henri Desroche, “Déchristianisation,” Dictionnaire de l’Histoire du christianisme, 347–354. 107. Claude Langlois, “Déchristianisation, sécularisation et vitalité religieuse. Débats de sociologues et pratiques d’historiens,” in Säkularisierung, Dechristianisierung, Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa. Bilanz und Perspektiven der Forschung, dir. Hartmut Lehmann (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997), 154–173; François Laplanche, “Sécularisation, déchristianisation, laïcisation en France (xvie–xixe siècles),” in ibid., 174–182; Hartmut Lehmann, “Von der Erforschung der Säkularisierung zur Erforschung von Prozessen der Dechristianisierung und der Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa,” in ibid., 9–31. See also Philippe Joutard (dir.), Du roi Très Chrétien à la laïcité républicaine

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 180

25-09-2021 09:26:56

Contextual Characteristics

181

(xviiie–xixe siècle), Histoire de la France religieuse vol. 3 (Paris: Seuil, 1991), 177– 330: “déchristianisation.” 108. Jean Delumeau, Le Catholicisme entre Luther et Voltaire (Paris: PUF, 1971). 109. Jean Delumeau, Le Christianisme va-t-il mourir ? (Paris: Hachette, 1977), 25. 110. Langlois, “Déchristianisation,” 166. 111. Delumeau, Christianisme, 29. 112. Ibid., 92. 113. Wessels, Europe. 114. Ibid., 47–54, 94–95, 154–160. 115. James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity. A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious Transformation (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). 116. Bruno Dumézil, Les racines chrétiennes de l’Europe. Conversion et liberté dans les royaumes barbares ve–viiie siècle (Paris: Fayard, 2005), 459–466. 117. Ibid., 463–464. 118. Ian N. Wood, The Missionary Life. Saints and the Evangelisation of Europe, 400–1050 (Harlow: Pearson, 2001). 119. Dumézil, Les racines, 22. 120. See point one under the heading “The Causes of Secularization” in chapter 2. 121. For example, we are thinking here of the wars of religion in France which left a lasting negative impression on the representation of Christianity, if not everything associated with “religion” altogether. 122. The historical origin of these ties do not come from Christianity, but from religions of Antiquity and from a political rule of the late Roman Empire. 123. Delumeau, Christianisme, 55–86. 124. Cf. Erich Auerbach, “Adam und Eva,” in Mimesis. Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendländischen Literatur (Bern: Francke, 1946). 125. Werner, “D’où l’Europe,” 25–26. 126. Peter Harrison, The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). 127. Gauchet, Désenchantement, II. 128. In France, the historian Pierre Chaunu demonstrated this problematic already in the late 1970s. 129. Primarily in the UN report: “Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?” UN Population Division, 2000: www​.u​​n​.org​​/ esa/​​popul​​ation​​/migr​​ation​​/migr​​ation​​/htm (consulted Nov. 30, 2008). 130. Jenkins, God’s Continent, 8. 131. Klaus Wetzel, Bevölkerungsentwicklung und Mission, coll. Korntaler Reihe n° 4 (Nuremberg: VTR, 2006), 129–149. 132. Ibid., 184. 133. Ibid., 41. 134. Ibid., 66–69. For fertility rates in Europe, cf. http:​/​/www​​.tout​​eleur​​ope​.f​​r​/fr/​​ actio​​ns​/so​​​cial/​​santé​-publ​ique/​prése​ntati​on/co​mpara​tif-l​e-tau​x-de-​fécon​dité-​​dans-​​les​ -e​​tats-​​membr​​es​.ht​​ml (consulted Aug. 7, 2008).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 181

25-09-2021 09:26:57

182

Chapter 3

135. For an overall view of immigration in Europe and theological approaches, see the following report from Darrel Jackson and Alessia Passareli (dir.), “Mapping Migration. Mapping Churches’ Responses. Europe Study,” Churches’ Commission for Migrants in Europe (CCME) and WCC, 2008. Available at http:​/​/www​​.oiko​​ umene​​.org/​​filea​​dmin/​​files​​/wcc-​​main/​​2008p​​dfs​/m​​appin​​​g​_mig​​ratio​n ​_europe2008​.pdf (consulted Aug. 7, 2008). 136. Franck Frégosi, Penser l’islam dans la laïcité. Les musulmans de France et la République (Paris: Fayard, 2008), 9. 137. Jenkins, God’s Continent, 10, 103–111. 138. Davie and Jenkins present similar figures. A rapprochement of their material yields the following result: Jenkins speaks of 16.75 Muslims, while Davie advances the figure of 14.32 million for twenty-seven European countries, plust Switzerland and Norway. Cf. Jenkins, God’s Continent, 15–17; Davie, Sociology, 167–170. 139. Jenkins, God’s Continent, 14–17, 113–115. 140. Ibid, 19–22. 141. Ibid, 17–19, 155–157. 142. Everything depends on what we mean by this term, including real engagement in Muslim practice and the possibility of its comparison between Christianity and Islam. 143. Frégosi, Penser l’islam, 111–117. 144. Ibid, 147–166; Jenkins, God’s Continent, 19–20. 145. Cf. countries like Algeria in the 1980s–1990s, or the Islamic revolution in Iran; but these are not European countries. 146. Ibid, 55–86, ch. 3. 147. Ibid, 74–75. Barrett et al. tally the population in Europe and Russia. The three “Christian minorities” are defined for these statistics as movements and not denominations, i.e. the whole of the three movements in all Christian denominations. David B. Barrett et al., World Christian Encyclopedia, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 12–15. 148. François Boespflug, “Religions missionnaires, religions non-missionnaires,” Revue des sciences religieuses 80 no. 2 (April 2006) 127–154. 149. David adopted this approach in her latest work, Sociology. This section largely follows her work. 150. Cf. Alban Bouvier and Philippe Steiner, La théorie du choix rationnel: Les Foundations of Social Theory de James S. Coleman en débat. Revue française de sociologie (April–June 2003). 151. Grace Davie, Religion in Modern Europe. A Memory Mutates (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Davie, “Exceptional Case,” 24–25. 152. José Casanova, Public Religions in the Modern World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994); Grace Davie, Europe: The Exceptional Case. Parameters of Faith in the Modern World (London: DLT, 2002). 153. Davie, “Exceptional Case,” 33–34. 154. Paul Valadier, Un christianisme d’avenir. Pour une nouvelle alliance entre raison et foi (Paris: Seuil, 1999), 23–30.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 182

25-09-2021 09:26:57

Contextual Characteristics

183

155. Polanyi, La logique ; Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge. Towards a PostCritical Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958); idem, Science, Faith and Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964); idem, The Tacit Dimension (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967); Lydia Jaeger, Croire et connaître. Einstein, Polanyi et les lois de la nature (Nogent-sur-Marne/Cléon d’Andran: Institut Biblique/ Excelsis, 1999), 17–74. 156. Bertrand Saint-Sernin, Le rationalisme qui vient (Paris: Gallimard, 2007). 157. Jürgen Habermas, Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion. Philosophische Aufsätze (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2005), 106–118. 158. See his famous speech upon receiving a peace prize awarded by German book editors in 2001: Jürgen Habermas, Glauben und Wissen (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2001). 159. Jürgen Habermas and Joseph Ratzinger, Dialektik der Säkularisierung. Über Vernunft und Religion (Fribourg/Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2005), 43. 160. Guillebaud considers that law cannot exist without morality. He points to an “optimist juridicism” regarding the isolation of law alone. Jean-Claude Guillebaud, La refondation du monde (Paris: Seuil, 1999), 18–20. 161. Cf. two works of Jean-Claude Guillebaud, Le goût de l’avenir, coll. Points essais (Paris: Seuil, 2003); idem, La force de conviction. À quoi pouvons-nous croire? coll. Points essais (Paris: Seuil, 2005). 162. Habermas, Naturalismus und Religion, 114–115. 163. Habermas and Ratzinger, Dialektik der Säkularisierung, 57. 164. Valadier, Christianisme d’avenir, 168. 165. This is a leitmotif in Polanyi’s work. 166. Saint-Sernin, Le rationalisme, 18–21, 195–275. 167. Paul Olivier, “Preuves de l’existence de Dieu,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 931–935; Bernard Sève, La question philosophique de l’existence de Dieu, 2nd ed. (Paris: PUF, 1997); Antoine Guggenheim, Les preuves de l’existence de Dieu. Des clefs pour le dialogue, coll. Essais de l’école cathédrale (Paris: Parole et Silence, 2008). 168. Robert Spaemann, Das unsterbliche Gerücht. Die Frage nach Gott und die Täuschung der Moderne, Stuttgart (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2007), 30–36; idem, Der letzte Gottesbeweis. Mit einer Einführung in die grossen Gottesbeweise und einem Kommentar zum Gottesbeweis Robert Spaemanns von Rolf Schönberger (Munich: Pattloch, 2007). 169. Sève, Existence de Dieu, 99–113; Cf. the major work of Henri Gouhier, Blaise Pascal. Conversion et apologétique, coll. Bibliothèque d’Histoire de la philosophie (Paris: Vrin, 1986). 170. Gouhier, Blaise Pascal, 104–112. 171. Jean-Claude Eslin, “Pascal peut-il être pour nous une voie vers Dieu?” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 266–278. 172. Richard Rorty, Philosophy and Social Hope (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1999), 37–38. See also Pascal Engel and Richard Rorty, À quoi bon la vérité ? coll. Nouveau Collège de Philosophie (Paris: Grasset, 2005). 173. Spaemann, Das unsterbliche Gerücht, 33.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 183

25-09-2021 09:26:58

184

Chapter 3

174. Yves Ledure, Le christianisme en refondation (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 2002). 175. Thus writes Joseph Moingt in the preface to ibid., 10. 176. René Girard, Les origines de la culture (Paris: Hachette, 2004), 19. 177. Gianni Vattimo, After Christianity, trans. Luca D’Isanto (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 6. 178. We have limited ourselves to five apologetic approaches. 179. Jacques Ellul, What I Believe, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989); Gianni Vattimo, Espérer croire, Paris, Seuil, 1998; Jean-Claude Guillebaud, Comment je suis redevenu chrétien, Paris, Albin Michel, 2007. 180. Vattimo, Espérer croire, 107; Valadier, Christianisme d’avenir, 169–172. Theologian Jürgen Werbieck explicitly says the same thing as Vattimo. He concludes his article on the biblical prohibition of making images of God addressing testimony as the only possibility of speaking the truth in an adequate way. Jürgen Werbieck, “Trugbilder oder Suchbilder? Ein Versuch über die Schwierigkeit, das biblische Bilderverbot theologisch zu befolgen,” in Die Macht der Bilder, coll. JBTh t. 13 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1999), 3–27. 181. Translator’s note: the repetitive wordplay in the French phrases here is difficult to render in English: “la mise en scène, la mise en page et la ‘mise en parole’.” 182. One possible etymology of religion is precisely to reunite (Fr. relier) from the Latin religare. 183. Patrick Evrard, “Esthétique,” Encylopédie du protestantisme (Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 1995), 521–527. 184. Sören Kierkegaard, Ou bien . . . ou bien, La reprise, Stades sur le chemin de la vie, La maladie à la mort, coll. Bouquins (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1993), 497–635, 869–944; Nelly Viallaneix, “Kierkegaard, Sören-Aabye,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 827–828; Rémy Hebding, Kierkegaard, coll. Temps et visages (Paris: Deslcée de Brouwer, 1999), 43–87. 185. We might legitimately ask what a theological perspective is doing in a philosophical paragraph. Nevertheless, it has its place here in light of its integrative concept centered on God. In such an approach, we cannot exclude God, even by means of epistemological compartmentalization. 186. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, La Gloire et la Croix. Les aspects esthétiques de la révélation, 4 vols. (Paris: Aubier, 1965–1983). [Tanslator’s note: cf. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, The Glory of the Lord: A Theological Aesthetics, 7 vols. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1983–1990).] 187. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, La Dramatique divine, 4 vols. (Paris/Namur: Lethielleux/Culture et vérité, 1984–1993). [Translator’s note: cf. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Theo-Drama: Theological Dramatic Theory, 5 vols. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989–1998).] 188. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Theologik, 3 vols. (Einsiedeln/Trèves: Johannes, 1987). [Translator’s note: cf. Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Theo-Logic, 3 vols. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2001–2005).] 189. Hans Belting, La Vraie Image. Croire aux images? (Paris: Gallimard, 2007).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 184

25-09-2021 09:26:59

Contextual Characteristics

185

190. Cf. “Mission et communication,” Perspectives missionnaires no. 57 (2009); Jean-Nicolas Bazin and Jérôme Cottin, Vers un christianisme virtuel? Enjeux et défis de l’Internet (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2003); Église​.co​m. L’Église face aux nouvelles technologies de communication, dir. Richard Gossin, coll. Travaux de la Faculté de Théologie Protestante de l’Université Marc Bloch de Strasbourg n° 11 (Strasbourg: Université Marc Bloch, 2001); Dominique Wolton, Internet. Petit manuel de survie (Paris: Flammarion, 2000). 191. “Cyberspace is not a religious construct per se, but . . . one way of understanding this new digital domain is as an attempt to construct a technological substitute for the Christian space of Heaven.” Margaret Wertheim, The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace. A History of Space from Dante to the Internet (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), 18, cited in Belting, Vraie Image, 34.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 185

25-09-2021 09:26:59

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 186

25-09-2021 09:26:59

Chapter 4

Theological Criteria

Here we follow the same methodological procedure as in the preceding chapter: we will first describe existing theological criteria developed by the three missiologists, Lesslie Newbigin, David J. Bosch, and Friedemann Walldorff, before adding our own criteria. We again emphasize that we develop the first section summarily, retaining only the general propositions of these authors for our reflections on and approach to a contextual theology. Throughout this chapter, the arguments will often move from a descriptive property to a prescriptive quality. This signifies that we have moved from relative contextual characteristics to authoritative theological criteria. By proceeding in this way, our theological contribution will bear more weight. THE THREE MISSIOLOGISTS’ THEOLOGICAL CRITERIA A Missionary Theology “Just as the Church ceases to be the Church if she is not a missionary, theology ceases to be theology if it loses its missionary character.”1 The first theological criterion of a Western missiology concerns theological teaching. We have enumerated the reasons for the “missionary taboo” in our Western culture. One reason invoked involves missiology’s marginalization in theology, a problem particular to the Western academic landscape. This marginalization was preceded by the standardization of the “fourfold model” of theological teaching in use since Schleiermacher, and by a strict division between the four theological disciplines which was durably installed over the two last centuries.2 A better integration of missiological study within theology does 187

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 187

25-09-2021 09:26:59

188

Chapter 4

not guarantee a better understanding of what missiology is, since mission has long been understood as the extension of the church and the evangelization of “lost souls.” For this approach, missiology was at best a practical discipline for the missionary which only concerned a small, “exotic” part of the clergy. Before a more prominent role for missiology within theological teaching could be proposed, a new definition of mission was needed; it came in the 1960s with the discovery of the missionary essence of the church itself.3 This striking fact indicates a good way forward for reforming theological studies. A Protestant perspective invites us to re-read the scriptures. The results of such an exegesis will provide us with new accents, allowing various biblical themes to be re-balanced in a coherent teaching. We should recognize the absence of the “missionary” theme in publications in exegetical, systematic, historical, and even practical theology. Yet early in the twentieth century, Martin Kähler already said that mission was the mother of theology.4 All New Testament exegetes admit that the beginning of Christian theology coincides with the beginning of the theology of mission. But too few existing studies deepen this theme and this connection. After considering reform of theological studies as a function of the missionary theme, we pose the question of the particular place of missiology within theological disciplines. We summarize the propositions of the missiologists under two approaches: we call the first the “inclusive approach,” in which missiology engages in dialogue with all the disciplines and connects them to the world.5 This approach would not call for a specific chair of missiology. The second approach can be called the “specific approach,” since it does call for a place within practical theology. It seems that Zorn adopts this model for historical reasons related to the evolution of the French context. The two models each have their advantages and their inconveniences. The latter proposition certainly presents the advantage of pragmatism and realism in a continental university landscape generally unfavorable toward missiology. The former approach might reveal itself full of potential for reforming the overall course of theological study. It represents what might be an ideal solution. Any reform solution should aim at a theological curriculum for the modern Western context. The question is simple: “what are theological studies for?” If these studies are aimed to train future officers of churches, present needs are heading in the direction of considerable growth in the church’s missionary competence. This reinforcement ought to begin in the education of future ministers serving the church. Without missiological aptitude, Western theologians may perhaps be isolated—not only from most of Christianity, but also from their contemporaries who no longer understand their “language” and their teaching. Should that moment come, Western theology will have lost her contextual pertinence and missionary force.6

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 188

25-09-2021 09:26:59

Theological Criteria

189

“Declericalization” of Theology Another proposal for missionary encounter with Western culture is formulated by Newbigin and Bosch in what we call a “theology of laicity.”7 This proposal is connected to the preceding criterion.8 The two authors wish to bridge the separate worlds of the public and private spheres. This separation will have consequences on the ministry of pastors and the commitment of laypersons. Bosch offers historical reasons for the training of these two groups which go back to the first centuries of the Christian church. The priesthood of all believers—itself a rediscovery and postulate of the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation—hardly translated into reality except in the radical branch of the Reformation. According to Newbigin, the professionalization of the pastorate entailed three regrettable effects: Christians acting in the world regarded theology as a specialist’s affair; theology’s retreat from secular affairs was reinforced by theologians themselves, showing laypersons that the Bible is only understandable by the specialist; and theologians also lack credibility when they venture into domains outside their specialty (e.g., politics and economics). Newbigin vehemently deplores this evolution with strong language, saying that the Bible was taken out of the hands of laypersons.9 Newbigin seeks to remedy this situation by “declericalizing” theology. He proposes that theologians confront their theological conceptions with the difficult realities of daily life before they address ethical, political, or economic questions. Churches are invited to create sharing groups for their members engaged in a secular professional activity. These experiences could be analyzed in light of the Gospel to better equip Christians in their daily labor. Revalorizing the ministry of laypersons would have two advantages. First, the witness of the church would be more credible since it would come from those who do not belong to the clergy. Then, it is the only way to begin to reunite what our culture has separated, the private and the public. For the lay members of the Church clearly belong to the public sphere and the secular world, while pastors belong to a separate “religious” world.

A new role for laypersons in the churches is imposed for pragmatic reasons (lack of candidates for full-time ministry, lack of financial means), theological reasons (all Christians are “priests” in the New Testament sense [1 Pet. 2:9]), ecclesiological reasons (the plurality of ministries and reciprocal edification [Eph 4:11–13]), and finally for missionary reasons (credibility of testimony, proximity to the realities of life, the importance of the task). The active Christian layperson could build bridges between the private and public spheres. She could be this “border-dweller” [Fr. frontalier; Ger. Grenzgänger] who knows her specific societal context intimately, who knows how to analyze it theologically, and who also lives in both “spheres.”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 189

25-09-2021 09:27:00

190

Chapter 4

Discovery of Eschatology Mission and eschatology have always mutually pollenated one another.10 Rare are the missionary enterprises which are not inspired by eschatological notions, even if derived from opposing traditions. Bosch highlights this affinity which has existed between the church’s mission and her expectation of a fundamental change in the future of humanity since the beginning of Christianity.11 Newbigin notes the eschatological dimension as the primary criterion of a Western missiology.12 Before the rediscovery of eschatology throughout the twentieth century, notably in the works of Johannes Weiss and Albert Schweitzer, the “ultimate ends” were organized according to a functional logic, an Enlightenment-era doctrine sanctioning moral conduct. “In this way, theological eschatology was largely responsible for its own secularization. For if morality constitutes the central theme of eschatology, the whole transcendent dimension is ultimately and definitively revealed to be superfluous.”13 The eschatological dimension of the evangelical message—and consequently, Christian hope—was largely passed over in silence. Newbigin speaks of this evolution in modernity in the superlative terms of the “emasculation” of the biblical message.14 Since the reopening of the “eschatological office,”15 four eschatological schools have developed, springing primarily from German theological hotbeds, each with its own repercussions on missiology: the dialectical, existential, actualized, and history of salvation schools. Bosch retains this latter model as the best bearer of an eschatology of mission in the perspective of late modernity. The eschatology of the history of salvation employs the kingdom of God as a hermeneutic key. The protagonists of this model foreground the simultaneously present and future character of the kingdom of God. We live in the time between the ascension and the Parousia of Christ. This intermediary time is the time of the Spirit and of mission. This latter constitutes its most significant characteristic. It is a preparation or even a precondition for Christ’s return in glory. Bosch nevertheless concedes that this model bears the seeds of its own abusive employment, either in the sense of an “extreme eschatologization of mission” or in the identification of “history with salvation.” The former abuse can invoke excessive optimism or hopeless pessimism concerning the vision of the world in missionary circles. The second abuse fuses salvation history with universal history. The first interpretation “secularizes” and the second “sacralizes” history. Bosch proposes a way forward by insisting on the necessity of maintaining the tension between eschatology and mission.16 Newbigin generally shares Bosch’s analysis in his reading of eschatological texts.17 Newbigin thinks that the idea of “progress” derived from Enlightenment philosophy entailed a depreciation of the human being. He

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 190

25-09-2021 09:27:00

Theological Criteria

191

explains this devaluing thus: the new conception of progress picks up the ancient classic pre-Christian tradition of the soul’s immortality. In modernity, humans working in the perspective of a new society will not live to see its accomplishment. According to this vision, the individual person will not experience the perfect society at the end of their life but will go to join a life after death in another world. This latter “reality” has no relation with earthly reality. And for the English missiologist, the rift appears here: individual history and the general destinies of this world have nothing in common in the Enlightenment perspective. Human life thus loses some of its unity and value. This explains the analysis of anthropological depreciation according to the philosophy of modernity. A dichotomous concept of modern times forcefully resurges. Newbigin opposes the fundamental unity of the human found in the perspective of biblical anthropology to this perspective. He asks: “Whence the destruction of this unity?” The response comes just as quickly: it is death, which creates this fatal dichotomy between two worlds (of my personal itinerary and of universal history). Death offers humanity the temptation to enclose themselves in the private sphere since they will never see anything beyond it. Humans do not yet see the unity of what they are living on this earth with what they will live in eternal life. They do not imagine the real harmony between a secret prayer and a public political act. Only faith in Jesus Christ, the resurrected one, can “fill” this ditch between public and private lives, between individual and universal histories. The eschatological stakes for missiology are high in a materialist Western society which refuses a teleological viewpoint. For a Western man torn apart by the compartmentalization of the spheres of his life, a biblical anthropology and eschatology offer a rediscovery of his dignity and his unity. An Historical Christology Different “intercultural” Christological approaches birthed in non-Western contexts enrich theological knowledge and can reveal neglected or omitted aspects of existing studies. They also reveal what Western theology has borrowed from its own culture. We nevertheless prefer to treat this characteristic of a European missiology from the standpoint of theology. We should not lose sight of the critical instance which the scriptures represent, despite the positive and mutual enrichment of the global Christian community by the diversity of Christological discourses. If not for this critical instance, we would run the risk of gradually adapting the Christ of the Scriptures to multiple and opposed contextual theological contexts. Enrichment would give way to the confusion or even deformation of Christ and his work, which would go against the affirmations of scripture. All contextual theology should measure itself against the norma normans of biblical revelation, without with it

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 191

25-09-2021 09:27:00

192

Chapter 4

relativizes and dilutes itself in an ocean of contextual theologies.18 The same danger exists for soteriology, but with graver consequences. The historical Christ of the Scriptures forms the fundamental criterion of contextual theology. The various Christological contributions issuing from a given context correspond to the norma normata which must ultimately be submitted to the authority of scripture.19 Why do we insist on this point, and why does the methodology of our study contradict our words?20 Our theological conviction is tied to preserving the center of the biblical message: the promise and the coming of the Messiah, the Savior of the world. Jesus Christ is the central person in the Bible. Of our three missiologists, only Walldorf postulates a biblical Christology as a criterion of a Western missiology.21 The central content of Christian mission is not primarily a message, but a person, the “Son of man.” Without Jesus no mission is possible, nor a missionary message. Walldorf draws attention to the foundation of the biblical message. Perhaps his two colleagues have sidelined this criterion because it is obvious and ought to be the foundation of every biblical missiology. Why bother explaining such an obvious fact? In Christian theology, soteriology depends on Christology: no salvation without Jesus. Even if the central person of Christianity no longer informs our societies as a transforming event of our culture (Christology), offers of “salvation” are pouring out from all sides in secularized society. It is a sort of postmodern, but “secularized,” soteriology. It is worth carefully examining various expressions of our Western society’s boast of a certain omnipotence. A Social Ethic The separation of value and fact and the ditch between private life and the public sphere are characteristics of our society. These two dichotomies ought to be surmounted and put in creative tension with one another, as proposed by Newbigin and Bosch.22 This contextual observation must be supplemented with a biblical postulate for a social ethics, at least if we understand Christian mission as broader than simple individual conversions.23 Christian churches should adopt a low profile for several reasons. According to Newbigin, freedom of thought and conscience are the most precious gifts of the Enlightenment. These advances were often made against the positions of churches. These latter should then confess that, when they constituted the majority in a given society, they often fought against freedom of conscience.24 Another ultimately humiliating fact (this time on the Protestant side) is that these churches easily accepted the private-public dichotomy, retreating into the private sphere.25 The British missiologist likewise puts the church on guard against her “old demon,” the constitution of an intolerant Christian state.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 192

25-09-2021 09:27:01

Theological Criteria

193

Bosch wants precisely to avoid the two temptations of Christians in relation to society. First, the path of a Christian society for all Europe must be excluded as a millenary reality. This idea which resurged all throughout the long history of Christianity is untenable according to Bosch because it eliminates all missionary attitude toward the people of this culture. In this, he echoes the analysis of Shenk presented above: the politicized mission during the Christianization of Europe was eliminated once Christianity was established since it no longer needed such a missionary expression. The second temptation to avoid is a complete retreat from public life and a concentration on the private spaces of the “religious,” thus satisfying public powers. The missionary church thus loses the right to critique society and all influence of construction and transformation in the world. The two missiologists’ paths thus separate over their propositions for a Christian social order. (a) Newbigin starts with the following challenge: how can real engagement with the supreme truth in Christ and tolerance toward lies coinhabit the same society? Newbigin clearly cannot let go of the truth in Jesus Christ. For Newbigin, one cannot think the truth without that which is in Jesus Christ. He details his proposition concerning the truth through three postulates. • Jesus warned the church against all coercion in communicating the truth. Allegiance to the reign of God can only exist in a framework of freedom. God has provided such a space, and state authority cannot put it in question. • God confided the truth of the Gospel to the church which is composed of sinners. The church has confused the veritable truth with its appropriation and interpretation of the truth. The community of sinners can transform the truth confided by God into a lie or an ideological justification of its own human interests. God thus uses other “servants,” and the state in particular, to lead the church to repentance. • Newbigin then recalls the discourses of John the evangelist (John 15–16). Jesus taught his disciples that they still had much to learn: the truth was not completely revealed, but according to his promise, the Holy Spirit would guide them in all truth. The context of this promise is situated in the future missionary experience of the church, which engages in dialogue with other cultures. The church learns new things through missionary dialogue and creates spaces for testimony about Christ. Newbigin concludes that it is possible for Christians to remain firm in their attachment to revealed truth and to engage in dialogue with those who do not

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 193

25-09-2021 09:27:01

194

Chapter 4

share this conviction. With this foundation laid, a true tolerance is conceivable which has nothing to do with indifference. It is also imaginable that a state might recognize the Christian faith as truth and that it might procure full freedom for those who have a different opinion. (b) Bosch prefers a theology of the kingdom of God to the notion of truth. The missionary mandate includes a critical function vis-à-vis society, calling it to repentance. This sort of Christianity can thus construct the world. A Western missiology must, therefore, necessarily end in a social and political ethic. For Bosch, a call to faith in God is not sufficient. Responses must be given to the question of the why of Christian existence. One part of these responses is situated in values like peace, justice, and reconciliation. The reality of the presence of the reign of God has ethical implications. It helps people find a response to the questions of their daily life. But Bosch specifies that nobody can construct this divine reign on earth. The kingdom of God is coming and remains a divine gift. We can nevertheless make it more visible and tangible through our evangelical witness. A Christian social ethic for the Western context must seek to build bridges between private and public spaces while retaining the preliminary condition of the proclamation of the Gospel, its free communication as public truth. It will then establish a critical relation toward a given society, calling it to repentance and proposing values for living. A Christian Spirituality We now turn from the social factor to the spiritual criterion of a Western missiology. The German missiologist Walldorf is the only one of our three missiologists to evoke a biblical spirituality. It figures in first place among his characteristics.26 This missionary conception understands evangelization in Europe as a spiritual challenge. For Walldorf, the heart of modernity resides in the conscious exclusion of the notion of transcendence. Western society finds itself in a “golden cage” and a “windowless world.” This state of a “godless” civilization must be overcome through a true encounter with God. The heart of mission in Europe is a communal and practical confidence toward God, along with the transformative presence of his word and Spirit. The prayer of Moses (Ex 33:18) could be a model for the church in modernity: “show me your glory.” Walldorf insists on the fact that only the glory of God can fulfill this “void” left in our society after the declaration of the death of God. Listening to the word of God in Scripture and in prayer, and the obedience of his church to his will, are the sources of mission for the European

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 194

25-09-2021 09:27:01

Theological Criteria

195

context. These sources become tangible through the healing and sanctifying divine presence at the heart of his church. If the church lives by drawing on this source, she will be qualified for missionary ministry. According to Walldorf, the central message of the Gospel is precisely the gift of justification by God in Jesus Christ. This offer of an encounter with the living God through a Christian spirituality27 answers the rise of “new spiritualities” described above. According to Jean-François Zorn, a Christian spirituality can respond to four existential needs of man: the meaning of life, happiness, unity, and identity. A rereading of the Gospel by modern man can bring him to recognize the work of Christ as a response to the deepest of needs. Zorn laments a lack of Christian spirituality in the Lutheran-Reformed milieu, and his propositions refer to another part of Protestantism: the awakening movements. He proposes, first, that each believer should explore the path of a spiritual pedagogy. He then resists “a far-too doctoral magisterial conception in our Churches.” Finally, he would like for the diaconal and missionary nature of the worship service to be revalorized.28 A missiology for Western culture cannot limit itself only to reforming theological studies, revalorizing the laicity and several biblical themes, and a peaceful retaking of the public sphere. Such renewal will not happen without the spiritual reform of Western churches and their members. A Living Community The following missiological criterion is linked to the preceding criterion: no Christian spirituality is possible without attachment to a community. With Bosch, we can affirm the same thing for mission and theology: “Theology does not exist unless it is borne by a community. This is equally true of mission.”29 Each of our three missiologists accentuate a living Christian community as a pertinent element of a biblical Western missiology. Missionary efforts and the courage to announce a salvation which we cannot prove are not the product of some heroism, but rather, for Newbigin, natural and spontaneous acts of a “celebrating community.” The community reflects a supranatural reality. This “radiance” is due to the abundant richness of the love of God and the presence of his Spirit among community members. The glory of God is given to believers so that they might be recognized as a community in which the love of God is known and lived (John 17:20–23).30 Bosch holds to Newbigin’s terminology, adding that a Christian community makes credible the proclamation of the Gospel in the context of our countries’ secularization.31 Walldorf highlights that the dominant criterion of mission is manifest in people who follow Christ together. A living Christian community takes on

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 195

25-09-2021 09:27:02

196

Chapter 4

“the function of a plausible apologetic structure.”32 The Bible describes two fundamental models of the missionary path: (a) The centripetal model: “mission as an invitation to come,” present primarily in the Old Testament. In the realization of a communal Christian life, this approach takes on a new importance for the European context. The Church of Jesus is a sign of the kingdom of God in the present. This poiema theou sparks a missionary dynamic in the sense of attraction. Communion and fraternity exert a powerful attractive force in a world dominated by anonymity. Walldorf (among others) sees an evangelizing koinonia in understanding the orthodox celebration of worship—the beauty, grace, and holiness of the Gospel as a force of attraction. (b) The centrifugal model: “mission as an imperative to go and cross borders,” present primarily in the New Testament. This approach stipulates that witnesses of the Gospel must go toward people who do not know God. Walldorf evokes here the crossing of cultural and social barriers, the learning of a new “language” which “new pagans” can understand, and the presence of Christians among them. This amount to a preliminary hermeneutic: men and women must encounter Christ in the life of a Christian before they can hear the Gospel. Walldorf develops this idea further. Humans who experience (a) a new life, (b) a new communion, and (c) a new hope can constitute baseline missionary communities in Europe. We will briefly develop these three elements. (a) Under the first item Walldorf presents a theology of conversion, defined as the return of lost man toward Christ, his redeemer. This conversion clearly presupposes the saving work of Christ on the cross as an objective event of salvation. It is exclusively the fruit of the Holy Spirit. The personal aspect of conversion must not be confused with individualism. On the contrary, it always signifies reorienting human accomplishments toward submission to the lordship of Christ. (b) Local Churches are the origin, method, and goal of mission. New believers are gathered in communities. The central aim of these latter is to proclaim the Gospel. The content of its message is not the Church itself. The goal is not the construction of human institutions, but the foundation of the Church of Jesus Christ as the communio sanctorum, the gathering of all believers. Walldorf cites eminent biblical passages describing what is “holy” and “holiness.” For Walldorf, the realization of the communion of the saints by all Christian denominations is a central element of renewed evangelization in Europe.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 196

25-09-2021 09:27:02

Theological Criteria

197

(c) Walldorf grounds the final factor on the relation between mission and creation. Nothing in creation is outside the scope of the resurrected Lord’s power. The new life received from God must be related to every domain of life. Here Walldorf employs the term inculturation, but not in the sense of creating a specific and separate Christian culture. Being a missionary church in Europe implies a “culture with, against, and for” (Mit-, Gegen-, and Für-Kultur). This signifies that the Church of Jesus Christ must contextualize the Gospel; it must form an alternative and critical community; and it must seek points of commonality in view of evangelizing the people of postmodernity. The women and men of the West do not need more of the “religions,” but a concrete model of life in which the story of salvation is not simply formalized, but lived in simplicity and fragility as a sign of the simultaneously present and future reign of God. This sort of delicate community could propose a “plausible apologetic structure” with considerable missionary attractivity. OTHER THEOLOGICAL CRITERIA A Postmodern Soteriology Scientism, technical and medical progress, multiple propositions for healing, the cult of the body and of youth, an explosion of alternative medicinal options and either a cult or taboo of death—these symptoms are very telling of the displacement of the offering of salvation, from transcendence toward immanence, from salvation to healing.33 We might speak of a “secularization” of soteriology. Ambient anthropocentrism bids man to seek salvation in immanence. Bound to this earth, this seeking must strip the notion of salvation of any metaphysical content. The disappearance of the term itself is certain, even if some of its content still drives the quest for the protection and development of Western humanity. The notion of salvation is outmoded and no longer bears any meaning, but its structural element unconsciously continues to inform human aspirations. Announcing an evangelical “salvation” henceforth becomes challenging, since the expression and content no longer range among available human symbolic resources. This proclamation will run aground on the most complete misunderstanding since it apparently no longer meets any need. Man is incapable of inserting this proposition into his philosophy of life because the metaphysical horizon has disappeared. How can one construct a postmodern soteriology if its content elicits neither question nor reaction? How can one preach the Gospel in a society which does not ask for it? Such is the considerable challenge posed for Western missiology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 197

25-09-2021 09:27:02

198

Chapter 4

Anthropological and Ethical Possibilities A contemporary soteriological approach will necessarily start with an anthropology and ethics developed in a secular perspective, since the theological path seems unrealistic. Man “saves” himself—this would be the theological interpretation of this attitude. This is also the human ideal of freedom, or simply its lived reality. We will non-exhaustively explore several anthropological and ethical options which, with their possibilities and their limits, might point us toward theological notions. We begin with anthropology, and more precisely, with fundamental human needs: (1) The search for identity is intensifying for Western man insofar as his identity is less and less “given” by traditional socialization of family and societal structures. Most children currently born in France are born outside of civilly married couples. A growing number are raised by a single parent. Conjugal relations are less and less stable, which translates into increased divorces and other relational ruptures. Nearly half of all couples separate in industrialized countries, which entails the reconstruction of the family. Without falling into nostalgia for some allegedly better past era, the challenges for the identity of a child born in the Western context are considerable. She cannot necessarily rely on her two biological parents or on a stable social context for her structuration and maturation anymore. Yet this group is essential and primary for her development; her parents are the first to “leave” a defining mark on her identity. The postulate of a multiple identity foreseen by certain moderns seems contradictory in-itself; the process of differentiation can ultimately only support one particular identity. In following the path of this growth, the young adolescent will have increasing possibilities of identification, each as attractive as the next. These choices will not diminish for the whole of her existence. “Modern” ideology will push her to never content herself with an identity, but to adapt and change to affirm her “modernity.” Humanity is condemned to construct itself under the constraint of its chosen freedom. This self-proclamation and self-founding through human comparison will prove difficult if a given person does not present the qualities lauded by society, nor make a good showing in the pitiless competition of comparison. The God of the Bible does not give us a fixed identity. From the time of our creation, an “evolving structure” of evolving blessing is given to each creature, composed both of permanent elements (body, character, the beneficent will of God) and variable elements (ethical attitudes, the transformation of thought, personal attitudes). Every person is willed by God. This creative will attributes a positive

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 198

25-09-2021 09:27:02

Theological Criteria

199

given identification to each person, a durable foundation to which they can constantly return. (2) The dignity of man is fixed from his creation, without waiting for the natural development of the person, without accounting for his natural or accidental alteration. “Created in the image of God” (Gen 1:26), “You have made them a little lower than God” (Ps 8:5); this lofty dignity suffers under the assault of sin, but this latter cannot annihilate it.34 It is true that the identity of man is certainly shaken by experiences of suffering, finitude, and evil. Christ thus intervenes through his saving work, offering us reconciliation with God and a new place in this relationship, that of filiation: to become “children of God” (John 1:12), or in an even stronger expression, “to become a son of God” (Gal 4:5–7).35 The realization of human dignity happens through the appropriation of this salvation acquired at the cross and confirmed by the resurrection. Human identity thus finds its definitive accomplishment in the free reception of forgiveness. Absolution alone permits the human to pronounce her first constitutive “I.” Freed from the weight of sin, she enjoys freedom in Christ.36 Man is thus liberated, in being the one God wants him to be. All human comparison and all identities imposed by men are relativized so that a person might freely receive his or her identity from and in God.37 (3) The human person in postmodernity is weary of the various clear separations produced by modernity: between science and faith, classic and alternative medicine, or subjectivity and objectivity (to take only a few examples). He aspires to a holistic conception of the world which corresponds to his need for unity. Man finds contradictions in the outward environment, but also in his innermost being. He wishes “to reconcile with himself,” to find “inward peace,” to be rid of the malaise which he struggles to identify and fight against. Guilt as a Christian explanation of the evils of the world is no longer applicable. On the contrary, this “guilttripping” must be done away with. The problem of sin is transformed into psychological illness, to which all kinds of therapists and therapies try to respond. Coinciding with the scientific-mechanical view of the world, functional and chemical responses to these problems are often preferred methods of treatment. But immediately afterward, or concurrently, man resorts to other techniques of well-being or psychological schools. We might ask ourselves if the therapist has not substituted for the priest and pastor. Have these innumerable psychological schools replaced the traditional response of Christianity? Despite their own self-conceptions, do they not respond to a religious need, or a simply human need? Theologian Jean-Daniel Causse has responded to these interrogations regarding psychotherapy: does it procure a profane salvation?38 Causse

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 199

25-09-2021 09:27:02

200

Chapter 4

explores a certain correspondence between faith and psychoanalysis, described under four aspects. Psychoanalysis is a movement of “belief” and the power of the word, involving an observable “grace” of healing which moves us toward self-acceptance. For Causse, a “translation” of salvation in the Christian sense into profane psychoanalytic territory is possible. But a fundamental incompatibility remains because New Testament salvation is a specific category which relates primarily to sin and promises eternal life. As with the search for identity, the human is “liberated” from traditional responses to satisfy the need for unity. But she is faced with a multitude of profane and psychological “salvations.” The constraint of this choice is no less easily borne than that of the traditional responses. The human must rely on all kinds of specialists, yet still without finding one who could offer a truly holistic “response.” In Christian doctrine, Christ presents himself as the “doctor” par excellence, proposing a total salvation to humanity (in all the synoptic Gospels: Matt. 9:12–13; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31–32). This salvation steps in at a precise moment in human life, but is only fully accomplished in the presence of God in eternity (cf. 1 Pet. 1:5). Forgiveness, which is the only certainty which exists in the present, is immediately accessible. Suffering continues to dominate this earth. Humans are subjected to it or constitute its source. Interpretation of suffering remains largely unclear. But a “Christian” response can also give it a positive meaning (cf. 1 Pet. 1:6–7). In any case, it is a sign of this deep wound, of this state which is the separation between God and humanity through sin. Various medical or psychological treatments and more or less serious alternative medicinal options can certainly offer relief, and perhaps even rehabilitation, but leave man in a kind of solitude since no specialist can treat him holistically as he desires. They leave him alone before the various therapies to choose from. He is also alone in confronting the mobilizations of his own therapeutic strength continually called for by psychological schools. And what if the sickness remains, the malaise persists and the lack of understanding of his own being continues to bring him down after so many unfruitful “therapies”? The lack of lived unity—or on the contrary, the mystery of a worry-free ­happiness—might leave man open to God’s offer of salvation. This salvation is not presented merely as a response to the deficit described; on the contrary, it can augment suffering further through the characteristic feature of Christian suffering: suffering because of the name of Jesus (John 15:18–21). Salvation might even turn its back on man in suffering, taking on an absurd aspect due to the apparent absence of God. But here there is a promise from God: his presence with those who suffer. The question of suffering will only be completely resolved in eternity. The lack of unity can perturb man to the point that he might seek a much deeper cause than his visible symptoms. A more profound break and a memory of an archaic unity persists within him.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 200

25-09-2021 09:27:03

Theological Criteria

201

In the Bible this rupture is called sin. It is a fundamental state which separates man, dominated by his divine ambition, from the holy God who cannot bear sin in his presence. In light of the impossibility of humans saving themselves, salvation consists in the fact that God is its origin; God provides the means for salvation. God is both the subject and the means of salvation. His son Jesus Christ will fill the ditch between God the father and sinful humans. Thus, through the forgiveness of her sins, the human creature can aspire to a new relation with her creator. The reestablishment of this relation is called reconciliation (Rom 5:10–11). This is the relational expression of soteriological vocabulary. The human can find a response to her need for internal unity thanks to a reestablished relation with her God. Certainly, the accomplishment of this unity is not given us in this present life, but its promise stands in for the reality and will carry the Christian beyond all experiences to the contrary. Knowing who we are, considering ourselves to be unique, and reconciling with our selves—these are fundamental needs (along with the search for justice, for happiness, for meaning in life, and the need for security). After these anthropological considerations, we now turn to several ethical concerns of Western man. (4) The concern for succeeding in life is a motivation innate to each human being. The definition of such a “quality” of life cannot be constructed by man himself, unless he accepts a definition given by the Gospel. Man defines what is well and good for himself. Moderns experience man’s autonomy in relation to religious “shackles” as a liberation. But this absolute freedom is an illusion since man is bound to his body and to the earth. The satisfaction of material needs is naturally proposed to man as the end of life. He is bound to creation. The pursuit of a total materialism, realized in so-called “consumer” societies, poses the question of the limit of this human freedom. An identity strongly anchored in such materialism alters the image and dignity of man. Autonomy of choice of one’s life without external authorities or orientations places an enormous weight on the individual. A multitude of ethical options are presented to man, who no longer knows according to which criteria or philosophy of living he should choose. The certainty of making the “good” choice diminishes before a plethora of options. The loss of certainty entails a search for assurance from someone else, visible in the publication of literature focused on well-being, personal development, human relation management, happiness, the meaning of life, various psychological (and pseudo-psychological) schools, but also visible in the consultation of all kinds of “specialists.” Western man is happy with his autonomy in ethical matters. He generally enjoys a high standard of living, but he does not manage to completely attain the ends which this freedom offers him. A

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 201

25-09-2021 09:27:03

202

Chapter 4

sort of moral confusion remains, reinforced by the domination and isolation of the ethical question. (5) Succeeding in life also raises the question of good and evil. Liberal Western societies offer a wide framework within which various moral orientations can flourish. Alongside these dispositions which concern the freedoms of expression, of conscience, and of religion, there are wider moral principles which protect life from destruction. This second category of laws largely derives from the Roman and Judeo-Christian traditions. Today, these laws no longer need to ground themselves in these traditions. They are justified through reflections focused on humanity and its interests. Whatever protects and develops human life is good. But new ethical questions arise on the margins of this legislation. A purely humanist, biological, and technological approach no longer suffices to sort out these challenges. From older questions such as the period of a pregnancy within which abortion is legally allowed to newer challenges posed by possibilities of procreational medicine, from the intercultural encounter between various legal approaches39 to interrogations concerning the end-of-life dignity of a suffering being, these questions cannot be delegated only to scientific experts or legislators. They demand a philosophical or religious response which says what is good or evil. A pluralist or relativist response is acceptable for secondary questions. But existential questions require a clear ethical response because the stakes are high. Here, confining values in the private sphere is no longer possible. And these values are nourished by ideological, philosophical, and religious contributions. (6) The problem of evil, understood by many Westerners as a purely ethical phenomenon, has yet to receive a satisfactory explanation. Belief in the profound goodness of man on the basis of the humanist ideology of the Enlightenment cannot explain the wars and atrocities committed in twentieth century Europe. The era of National Socialism in Germany, a party which attained power through a democratic vote, presents one of the most terrifying examples. The enigma of the personality of the Führer Adolf Hitler still has not been completely elucidated by historians. The world is not the same after the Shoah.40 The appearance of an absolute evil during this period sinks every philosophical project which regards human capabilities optimistically. If evil were solely an ethical phenomenon, it should have been removed from developed societies long ago. But its persistence calls optimist humanist hypotheses into question, leading the search for its origin beyond the ethical frontier. (7) The freedom in moral matters extolled by industrialized societies since 1968, which was inscribed in our laws in the following years, collapsed many taboos. But liberation from traditional and bourgeois ethics still

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 202

25-09-2021 09:27:03

Theological Criteria

203

says nothing about the quality of life of this new autonomy. How can one find a way through all these possible ethical options? By what criteria should one choose between this or that conception of life? Do humans indeed experience fewer problems, for example, in their emotional and sexual lives, or are the problems simply displaced? Have we abolished a taboo in favor of an excessive mediatization and psychologization of sexuality? Or have we simply displaced the taboo? If we are to talk of freedom, we must not only know what we have gotten rid of, but we must also say toward what end we are freed. Moral freedom is only one historical example among other “ethical” freedoms. This freedom is certainly operative to a certain point, but new possibilities of living present individuals with a considerable ethical imperative. It is a heavy weight in terms of choice and direction. ( 8) This domination of the ethical,41 observed in these four moral domains, again poses the question of resources. The four ethical challenges which have just been examined show that the human must create her own motivation and mobilize her own forces to accomplish her moral projects. An excessive moralization of human life and a moralizing society result from this evolution. The four elements cited conjointly present the limits of each enterprise or moral explanation of the problem. An ethical deficit opens up before our eyes, demanding other resources. In other words, postmodern and post-Christian ethics are lacking. They require their own “redemption” which man cannot provide since he is engulfed in the impasse of the ethical “whole.” This “redemption” can be offered by the evangelical project, since ethics in the New Testament sense is not isolated from redemption, and redemption precedes all Christian ethics (Gal 2:16). Ethics can thus be “saved” because it receives its proper place and value. If it runs aground, the effects of “redemption” will carry it; if it is crushing in its demands, it can be counterbalanced by the grace and forgiveness of God. Contextualization of Different Expressions of Salvation The second part of this section is devoted to different expressions which together form the notion of salvation in Jesus Christ. Which of these might best lend itself to an encounter with the worries of Western man? This involves a contextual choice, since the worries of Martin Luther in the sixteenth century—“How do I find a merciful God?”—lost their relevance for modern man long ago. For Luther, the notion of justification was privileged over other aspects of salvation. But what is the concern of our contemporaries? How can we connect with them through one of the New Testament

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 203

25-09-2021 09:27:03

204

Chapter 4

expressions of salvation? Let no one object that the reference to Martin Luther is more recent than the biblical message and language; why maintain such an “anachronism?” In this we call upon a theology of the Word of God which maintains its profound transcultural and transtemporal dynamic because it is the vector of the Good News. It maintains its current relevance because it remains the word of the living God addressed to all men. (1–2) Expiation (hilaskomai: Luke 18:13, Heb 2:17). The action of God through his sovereign high priest Jesus for the salvation of the world) and propitiation (hilastêrion, “the mercy seat” or “atonement cover” of the ark: Heb 9:5 [Ex 25:18]; Rom 3:25; this refers not to the place but the means of expiation through the blood of Jesus Christ) encompass the worship-ritual sense of reconciliation, the expiation of sin. Jesus Christ is the perfect expiatory victim (1 John 2:2, 4:10). The two terms are rarely used by New Testament authors (eight times in all), but their Hebrew equivalent is used abundantly throughout the Old Testament. (3) Reconciliation (katallassô) was initially a profane term describing a positive change in a broken or disturbed relationship. It concerned God-human relationships (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:18–20; Col 1:20, 22) and human-human relationships. God is the subject of reconciliation. It comes through the work of Christ, his death and resurrection. It must be understood as a gift of God founded only upon his initiative. Its nature resides in the end of hostilities between God and humans. This reestablishment can also renew human relations (Rom 11:15; 1 Cor 7:11; Eph 2:16).42 (4) Justice/justification (dikaiosunê/dikaioô), the principal soteriological term in Paul’s writings, describes how God is not disturbed in his absolutely just being by the infidelity of his chosen people. His just action will be widened to a new humanity through the salvific work of Christ. The “works of the law,” that is, the requirements of the law of Moses, cannot render humans “just” before the absolute holiness of God. Man can attain his justification only through absolute confidence in the efficacity of the death of Christ as a substitutionary means. This justification is purely gratuitous and founded on the grace of God. It reveals God’s justice anew and definitively (Rom 3:20–26).43 (5) Redemption (lyô/lytron) describes an event of liberation through the intervention of a third party or through the payment of a ransom (Mark 10:45: this is the climax of this Gospel’s content; Rev. 1:5; 1 Tim 2:5–6). The object of the payment concerns our iniquity (Tit 2:14), the curse of the law (Gal 3:13), “futile ways” of living

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 204

25-09-2021 09:27:04

Theological Criteria

(6)

(7)

205

(1 Pet. 1:18–19), and the power and slavery of sin (Heb 2:14–15; Rom 6:6–23). The expression salvation (sôzô) is close to redemption, but it encompasses a broader meaning: to save, to extract man from an existential danger. The synoptic Gospels relate the healings of Jesus as works of salvation. The typically religious signification of this expression and its centrality for the preaching of the primitive church is consummated in the book of Acts. Christ is the foundation, content, and end of the Gospel. He is the “savior,” a quality which describes his action for the salvation of men. Paul employs this term exclusively to designate this action of salvation. The Gospel produces salvation in the life of its hearers (Eph 1:13). It is the power of God (Rom 1:16). The goal of Christ’s enterprise consists in the salvation of sinners from perdition through the forgiveness of sins (Acts 10:43; 1 Cor 1:18; 1 Tim 1:15).44 The semantic field of forgiveness (aphiêmi) appears more in the Gospels than in other New Testament writings, mostly in the profane sense (“to leave, to abandon”), and also in a specifically religious sense for the forgiveness of sin (Mark 2:5–7). Paul prefers the expressions “to justify” and “to reconcile” to indicate this same action of God. The sinful state of man has destroyed his relationship with God. The forgiveness of God reestablishes the relation between creator and creature.45

These seven expressions present different aspects of the same principal event. Which comes nearest to the concerns of postmodern people? (1) Expiation and propitiation represent the worship-ritual aspect of salvation. Now, this “religious” side, strongly tied to a notion of sacrifice, figures in the distant past of the subconsciousness of Europeans. Nevertheless, a person with a religious or mystical fiber might be attracted by this religious connotation. But most secularized people will instead feel repulsed. That is, unless one adheres to a Girardian interpretation of our cultural history which imputes an extreme value to the “sacrificial mechanism” which continues to govern the world.46 In this case, it would be worth not ranging the “bloody” side of the Christian religion among the archaic elements, but to employ the Scriptures as a plausible interpretation of the world. (2) Justification, salvation and forgiveness are inseparable from a metaphysical perspective and the notion of sin (only God can declare righteous, save, and forgive man). But the will of God, expressed in the Old Testament by the law, is no longer known or sought. Sin is

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 205

25-09-2021 09:27:04

206

Chapter 4

revealed through the transgression of the law. But without recognition of the divine law and of God, there is no need for “salvation.” “Salvation” has transformed, as we have said above, into a concern for human well-being. Biblical salvation, by contrast, offers a wider dimension of meaning which extends to the physical well-being of man and his need for “healing.” Convergences between this human need and New Testament salvation can be observed and positively employed in a contextualization of the biblical term today. (3) Redemption is liberation from the power of sin. Certainly, the contemporary human seeks freedom as a notion from modernity with which she can identify. But this “freedom” has nothing to do with the content of redemption, except perhaps in unveiling the hidden dependencies of a consumer society and juxtaposing them with the Christian notion of evil. ( 4) Reconciliation might offer a perspective for rapprochement of Christian salvation and postmodern culture. This notion encompasses the perspectives of vertical (God—human) and horizontal (interhuman) relations. An anthropological “bridge” can be constructed between these two perspectives. The reestablishment of human relations can be an effect of the grace of God. We have noted the significant instability of human relations in our contemporary societies. Man aspires to be loved and to be safe in a relation with the other. Oftentimes, he observes the failure of his relations despite all the freedom available to him. A soteriology centered on reconciliation can teach him not to project all his expectations and needs onto a human being, but to reserve them for God. Rediscovering a relationship with God helps humans to balance their relationships by allowing for proper distance and closeness, to be free from dependance on human perspectives, to be realistic, to receive and to give, to support and to love. This first anthropological breach can help the human discover that relational problems have deeper causes stemming from human sin, and can open up other soteriological aspects which lead to the intersection of all the issues of her life in a relation with her God. She will finally understand that the salvation (used here in a broad sense) proposed in the person of Jesus will impact all aspects of her life. Salvation touches all of human existence. Concerning terminology, a vocabulary must be invented to mediate between the surrounding culture and biblical soteriology. This does not mean that older Christian representations which no longer speak to the people of a certain era can never become relevant again. For example, we have examined surveys highlighting that youths more easily accept notions of “hell” and “heaven.” Of course, it is important to understand exactly what is meant by these expressions. They have a connotation which can be prudently used once more in contextualizing soteriology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 206

25-09-2021 09:27:04

Theological Criteria

207

Sin: The Primary Obstacle We will now examine the primary difficulty posed to a contextualized soteriology in the West: evil (defined as sin in Christian theology). Western man (apparently, at least) no longer feels guilty before God. At best, he may see his guilty feelings psychologically, but he certainly will not seek forgiveness for his sin. For him, everything is “in order” and he definitely does not owe a thing to God. How, then, can he be shown a new path toward this doctrine of sin, which precedes soteriology? (1) First, we consider several observations in our society: (a) Why does a society which proclaims itself to be increasingly “free” produce more and more legal constraints? Both public and private life are increasingly legislated. Why are ethical questions increasingly dominant? Why is our society becoming increasingly moralizing, despite proclaiming the ideal of “freedom” loudly and clearly? (b) Why is it that a free-standing ethics cannot be developed, instead revealing lacks which necessitate “redemption” through other means and domains? (c) Why does the phenomenon of guilt persist as a universal experience, despite many attempts at is erasure?47 Why the existence of “confessions of sin” turned inside-out, as visible in numerous television programs whose goal is to show off of all kinds of “strange” behavior? Why such exhibitionism from actors, and such voyeurism from spectators? If our society lived a real moral pluralism, and if we were truly autonomous ethical subjects, there would be no place for such “reality TV” programs. But they apparently respond to a need for legitimacy granted by the other, and a search for authenticity which dethrones asking for forgiveness (which is grounded in defined moral norms and the notion of truth). (2) Next, we examine some biblical elements of hamartiology which point out the typically Western hubris of the “man-God”48: (a) To want to be like God (Gen 3:5) is the first temptation of humanity in the “paradise” described in the fall narrative. The search for autonomy has driven Western society toward unprecedented progress, involving enormous advances for humanity. But on the other side of the coin, it has simultaneously created the tools of its own destruction. The cultural mandate given by God to man (Gen 1:28) has not been respected. Western society has done away with God. It has proclaimed its own independence, become its own norm. Various totalitarianisms have placed humans at the center of their own concerns, thereby sowing the seeds of their own destruction.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 207

25-09-2021 09:27:04

208

Chapter 4

(b) Noah’s descendants succumbed to the same drive in wanting to build a city and a tower to “make a name for [them]selves” (Gen 11:1–9). Human presumption is immediately disciplined by God through a confusion of language, which temporarily blocks the path toward other initiatives at once more audacious and more destructive for humanity. (c) During the calling of Levi, some Pharisees were offended by Jesus because of his “bad” company (in the synoptic Gospels, cf. Matt. 9:9–13, Mark 2:13–17, and Luke 5:27–32). His enigmatic response seems to do away with those who claimed to be “healthy” regarding their salvation. But Jesus actually denounces the justice of the Pharisees, which blinds them to their truly “sinful” and “sick” state. The sin of the Pharisees resides precisely in their completely erroneous evaluation of their relationship with God. In their “strength” and their “good health,” they did not account for their true state of sin. A hamartiology for the Western world absolutely must conceive of a message for the “healthy,” for those who are so immersed in succeeding in life, for those who do not consider themselves to be “poor and miserable sinners” for even one second. The goal is not to cast doubt on the apparent mastery of their human existence, but to render such persons attentive to the risk of self-delusion in their self-evaluation. (d) A similar blindness is signaled in the Gospel of John (John 9:39–41). Jesus had just healed a man born blind and used this handicap as a metaphor for sin. Jesus says that the truly blind are those who think they can see. The Pharisees feel targeted by these remarks and ask him if they are part of this group. Jesus responds, “If you were blind, you would not have sin. But now that you say, ‘We see’, your sin remains.” Jean-Daniel Causse summarizes this interaction as follows: This definition of sin is thus not recognized blindness, but the persistent refusal to recognize one’s blindness. Jesus does not encounter humans who see, but blind people who think they can see and who, precisely for this reason, are blind. Thus, to be a sinner is not a matter of what makes us suffer, of our knowledge of our own failures, but rather, paradoxically, of what claims to make us live, of the source of our pride.49

A postmodern doctrine of sin must address “what claims to make us live.” It must rework the notion of human autonomy which shows the true face of “Western sin”: “We are doing fine, we are powerful, we are happy without God, we are rich, we lack nothing!” The refusal to adopt God’s viewpoint of ourselves and incredulity regarding his son Jesus are and remain the true nature of sin, for Western man as for all the rest of humanity.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 208

25-09-2021 09:27:04

Theological Criteria

209

To conclude this section, we note that a soteriology developed without a transcendent perspective is self-contradictory. Soteriology is a Christian doctrine and can only be defined by God’s existence and action for the good of humans. A soteriology without God could not properly be called soteriology at all. But if soteriology were to disappear, only ethics would remain. Morality could not carry on existing autonomously despite modern pretentions. It seeks other foundations, other resources. Without these latter, it is forced into isolation and condemned to overestimate its own value. Western humanity is constrained to “succeed” in life. The framework of “freedom” is vast, and available choices are immense and disconcerting. The pressure to succeed and to choose pushes an ethics deprived of God to its limits and demonstrates its shortcomings. Human “self-salvation” transforms into an impossible moralizing enterprise; it calls for a salvation coming from elsewhere. Of course, this way of posing the question of salvation is at least apparently excluded from Western discourse. But as the great ideologies and all other metanarratives run aground, it becomes urgent once more to talk of an offer of salvation coming from extra nos.50 The central message of the Bible is a witness to salvation by grace by means of faith. This redemption will truly liberate man from his own concepts, both of “salvation” and of “saving himself” by his own means. The personal appropriation of God’s forgiveness through “new birth” moves the person into a state of “freedom,” the freedom of the “children of God” (Rom 8:21, Gal 5:1), and conjointly offers her the gift of an identity from and in God. Salvation as proposed by Christ certainly bears anthropological and ethical implications. A secular postmodern soteriology is contradictory. It can only offer its paradox to God and recognize its fundamental sin of wanting to “save itself,” recognize its “blindness” and its hubris. But such a “conversion” necessitates the intervention of the Holy Spirit, who unmasks all illusions: the taboo of sin, the myth of human autonomy, the removal of God from our lives, etc. Only the Spirit can shed “light” on these imposters who have taken up residence at the heart of Western culture. An Exclusive Message in a Pluralistic World In chapter 3, we observed that the silence surrounding mission was partly tied to a fundamental rule of Western societies: religious pluralism, a notion seemingly in conflict with the exclusive message of the Gospel. A biblical missiology for the Western context must, therefore, address the relationship between a world of multiple religious, philosophical, and ideological expressions, and a message of apparently unique salvation. To do so will require, first, a preliminary examination of the possibility of a theological foundation of pluralism; and second, a response to the question: does Christian mission propose an exclusive message or not?

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 209

25-09-2021 09:27:05

210

Chapter 4

Several Perspectives on Pluralism (a) Empirical observations conducted by numerous sociological studies leave no doubt: we live in a “plural” societal environment.51 Until recently, this pluralism came more as a circumstance than as a desired condition for churches. These latter generally opposed this characteristic of modernity, putting up more or less resistance according to their soteriological and ecclesiological conceptions, as well as according to their position of authority within a given political system. (b) The philosophical (metaphysical) viewpoint begins with a postulate according to which reality is composed of different autonomous elements which do not form a homogeneous unity. (c) The theology of religions examines the relationship between the work of Christ and other religions with a view to interreligious dialogue. We can schematically distinguish three positions: the exclusivist model (there is no salvation outside of Christ); inclusivity (all people will be included in the mystery of redemption which is in Christ), and pluralism (Christ is not necessarily the sole mediator between God and humans).52 (d) But might there also be a theological legitimacy to pluralism outside of empirical methods? Neal Blough thinks that the church should support “a pragmatic religious pluralism on the level of ideas.” He refers to God the creator (all people are created by God in their diversity), his general providence (Matt. 5:45), and the weakness of Christ on the cross, who did not impose himself in his power. His future judgment would thus remove any possibility of imposing a human judgment. We might add to this list the plurality of divine revelations (Heb 1:1–4), even allowing for a clear distinction between the revelation through the prophets and revelation through the Son; a possible relative of a “natural revelation” (Rom 1–2), with its various observations of nature, history, man, and religion; and the multiplication of languages (and cultures) as a consequence of the presumption of humanity (Gen 11), but also its use by the Holy Spirit on the day of the church’s birth (Acts 2). The Limits of Pluralism These lines give us several indications favoring the theological legitimacy of pluralism. However, this notion remains ambiguous and limited. Pluralism is only the visible face of a reality which cannot hide the invisible reality of a cosmological unity whose author and goal is Jesus Christ (Col 1:13–20). It cannot be compared with an absolute relativism which is intolerant toward any truth claim. “The only admissible truth is thus one which affirms that there is no unique truth, but only different ways of understanding the world and human experience.”53 For Blough, this kind of pluralism leads nowhere

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 210

25-09-2021 09:27:05

Theological Criteria

211

because it no longer allows for the definition of good and evil. We would be left with an absence of universal values and the impossibility of reflection and ethical action. A certain expression of pluralism offers Western missionaries space for dialogue and the proclamation of the Christian message. Uniqueness, Exclusivity, Tolerance From the theological standpoint, missionary proclamation presupposes a unique message (in terms of its content and quality) in relation to other “narratives.” Does it really possess this uniqueness? According to scripture, the exclusivity of the missionary message is founded on the demand for exclusivity addressed by God to his creation. He is the one true God (cf. the first commandment of the decalogue: Ex 20:3). Theologian Helmut Burkhardt develops three reasons for its exclusivity: God is the creator the universe, which is the foundation of God’s exclusivity; The sin of man is the motive of this exclusivity; and the redemption of man is its goal.54 The uniqueness of theological questioning rests on the uniqueness of salvation in Jesus Christ. The one God gives his only son as a sacrifice for the sin of the world (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). This unique death becomes a unique salvation (Matt. 11:27; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). The uniqueness of divine revelation in Jesus Christ is tied to his work of redemption. This leaves a relative place for other revelations, which must nevertheless always be evaluated according to the supreme revelation. Creeds ranging from the early church (Apostle’s, Nicene, etc.) to the contemporary Barmen declaration (art. 1) highlight this scriptural teaching. The exclusivity of God, the uniqueness of the work of salvation of his son and his revelation are the pillars of the content of the missionary message. Exclusivity must be understood in this sense: it is a question of the offer of salvation for a lost world; it is, therefore, a question of life and death. This proclamation—which, incidentally, does not belong to the messenger (kêryx [Mark 1:45])—assume its dramatic expression; these are the true missiological stakes for the Western world. Does the church want to hide this skandalon (1 Cor 1:23) under pressure from a pluralist environment, inclining herself toward a free relativism—or, fortified by the Holy Spirit, will she have the courage of the weak, the courage to be the martys (Acts 1:8) of a salvific message? The church cannot abstract away from the pluralism of the Western world in all its forms. She cannot ignore other religions and offers of “salvation.”55 She must resolutely commit to dialogue with these latter. This encounter cannot be neutral, theoretical, or agnostic, but must be “engaged”56 and “determined.”57 She must walk the narrow path with an intersubjective tolerance (in her mode of dialogue, the respect and dignity of persons, etc.) and an objective intolerance (regarding the content of the evangelical message).58

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 211

25-09-2021 09:27:05

212

Chapter 4

Interreligious Dialogue The practice of interreligious dialogue certainly constitutes progress in the Western world in relation to other cultures.59 The recent history of the West and its political-institutional frameworks are favorable to such peaceful encounters between different religious expressions. We do not wish to question this very real progress, but we nevertheless maintain a critical attitude in relation to this pressing theological postulate and its practical application. (a) Regarding the preliminary conditions for such a dialogue, we must not forget that this postulate could be juxtaposed with cynicism in practice in developing countries. It is a luxury to be able to speak of “religion” when we have no access to water, food, or education. This last criterion is indispensable for creating a critical distance with one’s own religious heritage. More close to home, in our own latitudes we can theorize this dialogue, but it will probably remain very elitist since it requires a high level of theological competency beyond one’s own “religion” of origin. Philosophical and linguistic questions can also plague this theological project: how can one evaluate another religious tradition with one’s own “mobile” linguistic means? In his thesis, Patrik Fridlund esteems that it is problematic to link a conception of language to “stable” ideas such as a religion.60 By definition, language must be “mobile” to fulfill to its function. But any judgment seems to require “stable” linguistic entities. Fridllund pushes his reasoning even further: does information automatically lead to good judgment? He does not think so, since decisions are made by subjective people for whom other elements factor into evaluations of such questions. Fridlund demonstrates that the foundations of religious dialogues are not fixed, already in terms of the preliminary conditions of this dialogue. (b) Why does interreligious dialogue attract so much attention from theologians? Why does it occupy such a high place among theological concerns? Soteriology can provide an explanation. The ecumenical movement reached its peak in the twentieth century. Efforts at unity have since overstepped their initial limits, encompassing all religions. The twenty-first century might thus be designated the century of good interreligious relations (at least in terms of intentions). Theological concerns thus meet with the search for peace between religions and humans in general. This intersection is not surprising; humanity hopes for less violence and better understanding between men through fruitful interreligious dialogue. But it still raises the question of theology’s motives in such dialogue. Jean Baubérot observes that the ecumenical “strategy”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 212

25-09-2021 09:27:06

Theological Criteria

213

developed by Protestantism in France should lead to its integration into society. From this sociological angle, ecumenism was an expression of functional religion designed to grant some legitimacy to a declining French Protestantism. In other words, churches’ ecumenical concerns overlapped with their concern for the common good of society. This in turn granted churches some legitimacy, despite a general climate of indifference or hostility toward Christianity. The question is thus raised: is this search for legitimacy driving the efforts of theologians and churches committed to seeking understanding with other religions? If so, this worthwhile theological project risks being undermined from within.61 Churches’ underlying search for legitimacy would thus have outstripped their alleged principal aim. Philosopher Gilbert Vincent goes perhaps further in comparing the ecumenical movement to the concept of civil religion.62 This critique is also imaginable for the interreligious domain. But society can never grant a church its legitimacy. Interreligious dialogue includes the danger of proposing churches a social legitimacy in the guise of a theological conformity. But this is a false solution because churches are legitimate only when they are committed to the path of their primary and true mission: announcing the Gospel. Abandoning this mission amounts to losing their legitimacy before God, though not necessarily their legitimacy in the eyes of society. (c) The notion of Abrahamic ecumenism is often cited as an allegedly faithful common ground for the construction of the three monotheistic religions derived from this figure. The rapprochement of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity around this person is presented as an attainable intermediary step which might then become a trampoline for a larger interreligious amalgamation. This seems like a promising undertaking since Abraham bears a principal importance in all three religious traditions. But theologian Ulrike Bechmann incites us to prudence. In her habilitation thesis, she highlights that such uncritical rapprochement could lead to the opposite of dialogue.63 She shows that each of three religious communities holds a different perspective on the Abraham narrative. This distinction often leads to an exclusion of the other community. When carefully examined, Abraham is primarily an image of separation, not of a common homogeneous tradition. The citation of Abraham as representing the unity of the three Abrahamic religions does not hold up to theological analysis. At best, it corresponds to a vision of hypothetical unity, if not outright theological fantasy. It would be very difficult for this vision to provide reliable elements in a stable theological foundation for dialogue between these three religions.64 (d) The real challenge of interreligious dialogue is perhaps not ultimately a theological matter. Forged by a culture of tolerance, nurtured by no little

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 213

25-09-2021 09:27:06

214

Chapter 4

material wealth, the West sees no problem with interreligious dialogue. Material conditions allow for “tolerance” toward other persons practicing other religions. Secularized man can accept religious pluralism without any trouble since the “religious” question seems insignificant to him. For him, religious pluralism is a means for facilitating and encouraging disinterest in religion. The relativism of all ideologies is only the logical consequence of this “soft” pluralism, qualified thus because it is often inexplicit. Modern man has no need of ideological certainty in such an environment. His cultivated uncertainty flourishes in pluralism and with a high standard of living, culminating in the affirmation of “freedom.” But what if this setting were to change? What would Western man do if the standard of living dropped, if confronted with the loss of social assumptions, and if unemployment skyrocketed? In uncertain times, humans seek certainty once more. In this sense, the postulated interreligious dialogue would be merely an expression of their disinterest for “religion.” The proclaimed pluralism is “positive” as long as there are no existential crises, and as long as people are not experiencing an identity crisis. If indeed they are, humans might once again be ready to abandon the freedom of uncertainty in exchange for a strong ideological choice which allows them to get their bearings. Everything depends on the degree of uncertainty which people can bear. Cultural pluralism and the interreligious dialogue which is one of its expressions can only exist within a certain material environment. If this environment is lacking, pluralism might come into question. We observe non-theological interdependencies which play a determining role: the more man evolves within a comfortable material and pluralist political framework, the more he can allow himself to live far from the certainties which ideologies give him. The more persons are confronted with material poverty, the more they need foundations which produce certitude.65 To be clear: there is no alternative to interreligious dialogue. We are condemned—or, more positively, invited—to discover the otherness of our neighbor. We do not want to go back to the time of European wars of religion. We recognize the importance of the value of tolerance which has come at great cost. Interreligious dialogue is part of a missiology for the European context. But its subjects must be aware that it is only practicable within a certain material and cultural framework, that it is difficult to transpose it into other non-Western spheres, and that a realist approach is required in its practice. It is not justified as the ultimate end of the missionary process, nor as legitimation of churches in their societies. But it is an important goal for human well-being (cf. the human cultural mandate) and an indispensable step in the proclamation of the Gospel (cf. the mission of evangelization).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 214

25-09-2021 09:27:06

Theological Criteria

215

Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation We saw earlier that Saint-Sernin emphasized the importance of Christian conceptions of anthropological human unity and the mystical body66 for the development of a “new rationalism” which would allow for a quantitative and qualitative leap, and above all a better division and utilization of scientific knowledge on a global scale. Ledure draws attention to the considerable anthropological resources offered by the evangelical message. Newbigin presents the fundamental unity of man from a biblical viewpoint, which contradicts the establishment of a dichotomy between private history and universal history. In our opinion, these three authors’ anthropological contributions should be deepened. The critique of excessive compartmentalization of various spheres of life will be grounded primarily on the anthropological unity of man, and secondarily on the overarching goal of salvation. We will finish by deriving several implications. The Anthropological Unity of the Human The richness of biblical anthropology surpasses all historical theological approaches, going beyond mediations of the Greek church fathers (the spirit-soul-body trichotomy) or the early Latin church (the body-soul dichotomy), beyond Plato’s influence on Augustine (in the latter’s response to Manicheism and pursuit of the Platonic tradition) and Aristotle’s influence on Aquinas (man as a rational animal). These approaches responded to challenges of their times. If various elements constitute the human from a theological standpoint, we should speak not of a dichotomy or a trichotomy, but rather of a quadrichotomy (spirit-soul-body-heart).67 The analysis of these notions in the Old Testament shows the particularity of each of these terms, but also their occasionally extreme amplitude, which sometimes embraces the totality of the person. The particularity of each semantic field is not an argument for emphasizing the separation of the various aspects of human nature. The person is an indissoluble unity composed of different elements. The separation of the world into different subjects and spaces corresponds to a modern logic of efficacy, but biblical anthropology forbids such radical separation, seeing it as entailing the loss of the human’s humanity. The rigidity of typically Western dislocations (which is the fruit of a long historical process) thus finds itself in increasing tension with a biblical anthropology. These disarticulations require a theological analysis, providing a foundation upon which a missiology for the Western context might build.68 The Overarching Goal of Salvation The overarching plan of divine salvation corresponds to the unified constitution of the human. Salvation in and through Jesus Christ is addressed to

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 215

25-09-2021 09:27:06

216

Chapter 4

the whole human in her unity and her differing elements (a). The reality of salvation on an individual scale follows its conceptual unity (b). Finally, the salvation of individual humans happens in time, a limited time which begins with conversion and culminates in eternal blessedness (c). (a) The incarnation of God (Jesus’ appearance in a human body) marks the objective of salvation, humanity in flesh and blood. During his earthly ministry, Jesus calls to conversion (Matt. 4:17), casts out demons (Luke 4:33–35), and heals the sick (Matt. 12:22). Of course, the healings and other miracles are primarily signs of the nearness of God’s reign. They are all directed toward the ultimate “sign” which is not a sign—the cross at Golgotha.69 But beyond the signification of God’s reign, Jesus’ concern for people touches all areas of human existence: the body, the spirit, and the soul. Jesus presents himself as having the power to forgive (Mark 2:5–10), as a doctor (Luke 4:23, 5:31–32), as a liberator (Luke 8:26–39). All parts of the human are thus exposed to the light of salvific offer. The whole man is invited to a radical return to God. This return implies a transformation of all the elements of his nature. Certain changes are immediate, others are yet to come, with the whole held in eschatological tension. God’s project of salvation encompasses the whole human, as demonstrated by the New Testament term sôzô, signifying both healing of the sick (Matt. 9:21–22) and messianic salvation (1 Cor 1:21).70 (b) The conceptual unity of salvation refers to all the steps of salvation in the Christian life integrated into a unified concept.71 The various steps in the individual actualization of salvation unfold thus: through the Holy Spirit, the word of God kindles human faith in God’s free offer of forgiveness; the human consciously lives this justification through grace by means of faith in conversion; the indwelling of the Holy Spirit allows for the sanctification of the person; this indwelling is first the object (like justification—cf. 1 Cor 1:30), then the goal of faith; the permanent process of repentance (the least common denominator for defining sanctification) allows for the construction of a new ethic, both in thoughts, values, and actions; the work of salvation ultimately ends in the body, the ultimate domain of ethical application.72 The strength of the Holy Spirit pierces every strata of the person. But the “new man” only knows the perfection of the salvific work through faith. In reality, he suffers because the accomplishment is not promised within earthly existence (Rom 8:19–23). The forgiveness of sin is immediately accessible, but perfection (accomplished holiness) is not imaginable, even if the newness of life allows for real changes.73 In spite of everything, the body is exposed to the consequences of a fallen creation. Miraculous healing exists but remains miraculous, and thus exceptional. The Christian’s suffering in

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 216

25-09-2021 09:27:06

Theological Criteria

217

expectation of the final accomplishment of salvation will remain until she puts on the new body of the resurrection. Salvation will thus have fully attained the corporeal element of humanity. All these steps together constitute the work of salvation. They are not necessarily successive, but sometimes happen simultaneously. They are interdependent and inseparable. Justification by grace is the foundation of the Christian upon which the process of sanctification continually draws for nourishment. “Works” (and other ethical domains) are equally fruits of justification. This conceptual unity does not permit the separation of ethics from the doctrine of justification. An isolated ethics cannot be self-sufficient because it lacks the essential; it will be condemned to become a legalism lacking sensitivity to grace. This is perhaps the paradox of Western culture: a proclaimed “freedom” finds itself faced with a proliferation of legal and juridical texts which contradict this proclaimed value. Society is condemned to accelerate this evolution if it cannot resort to other moral principles and liberating messages. But with the separation of the message from ethics, such recourse becomes impossible. (c) The work of salvation in the human happens in stages. “Stages” implies temporal duration. The human is saved “in hope” (Rom 8:24–25). The accomplishment of salvation always includes an inherent and unavoidable eschatological tension. Salvation always involves a present and future aspect.74 Despite this temporal expanse, the work of God for humans remains global in scope. In sum, the overarching design of the salvific work is visible in its human object (a), in its conceptual accomplishment (b), and even in its temporal perspective stretched between the present and the future (c). Implications The unity of the human and the overarching goal of salvation consequently oppose all the radical separations which Western culture brings: separation of private and public life, of values and facts, of subjectivism and objectivism, of science and faith. While a relative segmentation is possible and sometimes necessary to allow for the harmonious life of humans or for scientific research, as we have seen in the biblical conception of the human, no domain can claim immunity from the action of God. The unity of the human is a fundamental characteristic which is part of their profound dignity. Yet this dignity is increasingly diminished through the force of separations. The human no longer recognizes herself in the sometimes completely opposed spheres of work, family, and social life. The cohesion of the human and the overarching design of salvation are ultimately founded on the one God.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 217

25-09-2021 09:27:07

218

Chapter 4

Without the unity of the created universe and the unity of God, missiological discourse cannot pierce the various separated parts of the human. It is a condition for the proclamation of Christ because his work has cosmic repercussions. Confining religion and ethics to private space might correspond to the cultural mandate of man desired by God. It may be a foundation for the peaceable proclamation of all human messages, including the Gospel. But this separation might equally be turned against evangelical proclamation, becoming a means for removing the Gospel from public space. In this case the church could not accept such a withdrawal. She must confront the “walls of separation” which surround her to courageously proclaim her message. The separation of public and private space might grant a possible place and voice to the church. She should be grateful for this recognition. But if she allows herself to be closed into this space, she will find herself in a golden cage which is comfortable, but which stifles her voice.75 The missionary church in Europe can no longer count on a privileged place in society. She can no longer hope for a position of power. In any case, this does not correspond to her ideal. She should give thanks for her freedom of expression while remaining vigilant. She submits to the various social structures and organizations as long as she retains a free word. Otherwise, she must raise her prophetic voice, going beyond the structures which close her in.76 In this sense, the various situations of each political context should be analyzed with lucidity. The free proclamation of the Gospel will not depend uniquely on the political system in place, but also on the missionary vitality of the church. Aesthetics and the Word Faced with the excessive aesthetic imperative of our society, we must propose a more considered theology of aesthetics. A theology of the word retains aesthetics in its implosion and ties it to the more consistent foundation of the word of God. The implications of this relationship between the beautiful and the word of God will be described at the end of this section. A Theology of Aesthetics Art, experience, images, music, feelings, and many other domains of the sensible figure in the category of the aesthetic. Part of the biblical tradition and part of the Christian tradition (notably Reformed Protestantism) have always opposed the domination of aesthetics, seeing it as an adversary of the word of God, or a place of almost inevitable idolatry.77 We will first revisit this theological critique of aesthetics (a) before constructing a biblical theology of aesthetics (b).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 218

25-09-2021 09:27:07

Theological Criteria

219

(a) Theologically, the critique of aesthetics certainly originates in the Decalogue, in the second commandment prohibition of representing God. According to one’s theological interpretation and its relation to authoritative texts, a tradition favorable or averse to (i.e., iconoclastic) images came about in certain regions and during certain eras in Christendom. Iconoclasm, which was radicalized during the Protestant Reformations, continued in the Reformed tradition and even carried into Pietism to a lesser extent, while sacred art attained its apogee in the Church of the Middle Ages. The negative interpretation of the commandment is based on its proximity with the first commandment. Together, the two commandments form a barrier against all idolatry—a constant danger visible in the times of the prophets. The representation of God can take on an autonomous role for the observer, becoming an object of direct or indirect adoration. The first and second commandment serve to guard the heart of theology in the strict sense of the term: the uniqueness of God. The variously justified or exaggerated radicality linked to interpretations of this commandment are thus understandable. God must be protected from idolatrous assaults of all kinds. But this protection also concerns humans because God does not need human protection. Humans must be preserved from idolatry so that they do not worship inexistant false gods. The dike formed by the first two commandments is justified. It suppresses all attempts to visualize the invisible God, instead favoring a more serene means of revelation: the word. In the New Testament, the period of Jesus Christ’s earthly life, when he was visible, finishes with the ascension of the resurrected one; God becomes invisible once more. Seeing him is no longer possible. Sight cedes its place to the hearing of the word of God, which relates the revelations of the past. Thomas becomes the model for all believers of post-paschal times who want to see Jesus as he did, but who cannot.78 Contrary to habitual treatments of this passage, Jesus does not reprimand Thomas, but gives him a great promise in the form of a beatitude (John 20:29). Thomas should not see himself as a lesser disciple because he was not present at the appearance of the risen one with the other disciples. Thomas—and all the disciples of future generations along with him—are just as privileged as those living at the time of Jesus because God continues to reveal himself, no longer by sight, but through hearing. Hearing refers back to the word of God. The priority of God’s word over sight is maintained as in the Old Testament. In the Decalogue, the veracity and uniqueness of God are protected; in the New Testament, after the ascension a form of privileged revelation is emphasized. The ultimate revelation of God in his son Jesus cannot be surpassed (Heb 1:1–4). All that remains is the narration of this event by

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 219

25-09-2021 09:27:07

220

Chapter 4

the word of God. These two primary axes which run through all of scripture drive the fundamental theological critique of aesthetic proliferation. (b) This critique does not mean that we cannot develop an aesthetic theology at all. On the contrary, according to Ulrich Körtner, a doctrine of the word of God necessitates a theory of aesthetic experience, since the word of God is always communicated in a sensible manner and moves toward an integral human experience.79 The doctrine of the word of God has a critical function vis-à-vis aesthetics but must nevertheless leave it a definite place. There are multiple possibilities for an aesthetic theology: (i)

The human cultural mandate (Gen 1:28) and the corporeal constitution of the human call for a general cultural creation which includes an aesthetic component. (ii) The second commandment does not forbid creating pictures and sculptures, but their adoration as a divinity. It is tied to the first commandment, the combat against idolatry. And it targets the fabrication of divine representations. The message of the Old Testament is not against artistic expression, for example, as demonstrated in the divine indications for the construction of the tabernacle. The prohibition opposes all abuse of human power before God as a consequence of idolatry. Man tries thus to “master” God through aesthetic creation. The appearance of God in his revelations could incite the desire to define God through artistic creation. In this sense, the second commandment becomes a counterweight for divine revelation. God does not allow himself to be identified by his appearance, but by his liberating action, his covenant, and his law.80 (iii) Approaches for construction a theological aesthetics exist, but are rudimentary (with the significant exception of the work of Von Balthasar). This sort of theology foregrounds the beauty of theological “substance” (e.g., God himself, the figure of Christ, Easter and the work of salvation) and not its “form.” The two are indissociable. The object of theology, God himself, is beautiful. His beauty is the starting point for the whole theological discourse. (iv) By contrast, an aesthetic theology will concentrate on the “form” of the evangelical message on the one hand, and on the perception of the message by its addressee on the other. The context of our culture’s aestheticizing excess naturally encounters a “Christian” aesthetics. The challenge of this correlation for a missiology of the Western context is enormous and should form a principal axis of our contextual theology. It is unavoidable that a missiology for the European context will find its starting point in the domination of aesthetics in our time. It should thus create ties with an aesthetic theology to culminate in a theological aesthetics: an encounter

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 220

25-09-2021 09:27:07

Theological Criteria

221

with the true God beyond all forms of the sensible. By definition, an aesthetic theology should thus be attractive and not critical, to direct the human toward a theological aesthetics which would be necessarily critical and ambivalent, balancing the “ugly” and the “beautiful” of divine revelation. (c) A theological aesthetics will always break the bonds of isolation which seek to surround it. As noted above, in the long run the sensible cannot exist independently; it is philosophically and anthropologically related to ethics. This is also true in theology: God is beautiful and good, and the sinner’s justification by grace will always have an ultimate moral implication: the “good” (ethics) and the “beautiful” (aesthetics) are connected. We can thus speak of an aesthetic ethics of the New Testament. It emerges in places like 1 Peter when the apostle speaks of “works.” The “good” and “beautiful” behavior of Christians in a hostile environment can have a missionary effect on pagans (1 Pet. 2:11–12). In Greek, kalos can be translated in both senses: the same term embraces both morality and beauty.81 If the “beautiful” is separated from the “good” as we experience it in our highly stratified culture, the sensible will progressively lose its consistency. Aesthetics is nourished by its relationship with ethics. Morality can live without the “beautiful” from a theological standpoint, but aesthetics would be thus condemned to death. (d) Aesthetics as a scientific discipline examines the beautiful and the ugly as antagonisms. Theological aesthetics is not only concerned with the “beautiful,” as the infinite beauty of the Lord might lead us to believe. Even if there is only light in God, his revelation oscillates between two poles. Körtner notes that the beautiful is an eschatological term; as a category it is “broken by Christology.” The servant’s song in Isaiah 53 describes this servant in the most repugnant terms. Christianity has interpreted this text messianically.82 The theology of the cross is situated in this “ugly” lineage. But this ugliness is a promise of transformation on Easter morning which again reflects the splendid beauty of the work of salvation. A theological aesthetics thus has the critical task of interrogating the ambiguity of appearance. These six paths are largely sufficient to construct a theological aesthetics and a constructive aesthetic theology alongside the doctrine of the word of God. A Theology of the Word The communication of God is a precondition for all knowledge of God and for a relation with God (belief). The word of God thus occupies a primordial place in the doctrine of revelation.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 221

25-09-2021 09:27:07

222

Chapter 4

(a) We will first describe the various meanings of the word of God in Scripture and in theology: (i) (ii)







(b)

God speaks through his creation; he created it by his word. The word of Yahweh is addressed to his called servants—first to Abraham, then Moses, and finally to the prophets. God thus reveals his will to judge or save his people Israel. (iii) In the Old Testament, the expression “word of God” signifies the word spoken by God and its repetition by men. This word includes both the oral and later written traditions over time. (iv) In the New Testament, the Old Testament expression almost refers almost exclusively to the person, work, and teaching of Jesus Christ. In the prologue to his Gospel, John the evangelist identifies this notion with the incarnate Christ, the fulness of the revelation of God. Christ becomes the word of God par excellence. (v) Apostolic preaching places this dead and resurrected Christ at the heart of its proclamation. The “word of God” here defines the historical Christ and his salvific action in the present. (vi) The Reformers relied heavily on the primary importance of scripture and preaching, with Christ as the center. All of scripture is the word of God. God speaks through prophetic and apostolic discourse. Preaching is also the “word of God”; like the sacraments, it is considered as a particular expression of the Grace of God. (vii) All the Reformers agree that the word of God can only be heard, accepted, and believed by the action of the Holy Spirit. Lutheran theology holds that the Spirit acts through the spoken word (per verbum), while in the Reformed tradition, the Spirit’s action is joined to the word (cum verbo). (viii) Karl Barth distinguishes the incarnate word (Christ), the written word (the Bible), and the preached word (preaching). The two latter forms are only indirectly identified with the word of God. God alone decides when they will become a direct word of God. The first form corresponds to a direct identification.83 Hermeneutics and the texts of Scripture have a common history given their inherent relation, with the word of God as the object (classical hermeneutics) or the subject of hermeneutics (“new hermeneutics”). After starting out as the interpretation or search for an appropriate interpretation of scripture, hermeneutics evolved into an independent discipline in the eighteenth century. Friedrich Schleiermacher is the “father” of modern hermeneutics. He sought to liberate this auxiliary discipline from its marginal existence and grant it a cardinal place as an overarching science of understanding. Schleiermacher surpasses philological hermeneutics and moves toward psychological understanding.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 222

25-09-2021 09:27:07

Theological Criteria

223

This orientation was developed by Wilhelm Dilthey and Martin Heidegger. Dilthey notes a difference between the natural sciences (seeking to explain a phenomenon) and those of the mind (seeking to understand a spiritual fact). What were formerly spiritual facts can be revisited through an analysis of literary expression of its fixation and by examining the original spiritual experience of empathy. Heidegger inverts the old hermeneutic schema: understanding precedes all interpretation by the simple fact that man exists and that this existence already implies knowledge of our individual being. Rudolf Bultmann takes this hermeneutical philosophical impulse and adopts Heidegger’s notion of pre-understanding, linking it to his exegetical preoccupations and his concern for moderns who do not share a biblical vision of the world. His theological program executes a double task: remove everything from scripture which poses an obstacle to human intelligence, and offer biblical responses to human questions. Bultmann uniquely combines the general hermeneutical tradition with a properly theological hermeneutic. His approach aims to allow the text to speak in the name of God. Bultmann’s two students Ernst Fuchs and Gerhard Ebeling project us into the “new hermeneutics” in the 1960s. Hermeneutics is again recentered on the word in a strictly theological way. It is tied to the text and the historical Christ, foregrounding the concept of a “word event” (Sprachereignis). What is this “linguistic event” for Fuchs? First, it involves an element of language since it appears in language. Second, it is a manifestation which transforms and liberates humans by its force. Transposed into theology, this implies that the words of Jesus are a “word event” when they are received as such. Fuchs’ hermeneutics turns on language. Precisely, it is “the theory of the language of faith” because faith lives on the words of the New Testament and naturally directs us toward preaching. According to Ebeling’s hermeneutics, the word must be allowed to act through its language. The word is the object of hermeneutics; it is the doctrine of the word of God. His hermeneutical theology is inserted within fundamental theology and illuminates the problematics and breadth of theological work. Hermeneutic theology seeks to serve theology so that the event of the originary word retains all its hermeneutical power in relation to existence, and that the word of preaching might come, once again, as an event of the word.84

Thus, this approach resembles a theology of preaching and shares a priority of dialectical theology.85 (c) After presenting the various meanings of the word of God and an excursus in hermeneutics, we return to the effects of the word in the New Testament: the word of God is living and permanent (1 Pet. 1:23). Assimilated

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 223

25-09-2021 09:27:08

224

Chapter 4

with the Gospel, it becomes the power of salvation (Rom 1:16) and leads to new birth (1 Pet. 1:23), which proves that it is a “word of salvation” (Acts 13:26). Hearing is the privileged medium of the communication of the word of God (Rom 10:17). Faith is formed by the word of Christ after his ascension. The elevated and invisible Christ generally will no longer be revealed by sight, but by hearing (as noted based on Thomas’s aspiration). The Holy Spirit is of central importance in the vivification of the canonical and kerygmatic word of God. His presence for the post-paschal era does not leave contemporary disciples in disarray before the invisible since he will be the true master of the word (John 14:26) who will enlighten all human awareness for salvation or judgment (John 16:8–11). These effects define him as the true “Spirit of truth” (John 14:17). The word of God and the Holy Spirit allow faith to be born. But the word also remains the primordial factor in teaching which leads to sanctification (Heb 5:11–6:3, 1 Pet. 2:2). It is thus determinative for the believer’s “perfection.” The “parable of the sower” (Luke 8:4–15) would be more aptly dubbed the “parable of listening” since the seed (the word of God) searches for a favorable reception in the earth (listening) in which it was sown. The dynamic effect of the word of God and its correlation with a human reception through hearing are marvelously manifest in this parable. Finally, this word creates and gathers a new community (Luke 8:19–21). The church is founded at the very moment of its hearing and its obedience when confronted with the word of God. (d) These several summary paths suffice to show the capital importance of the word of God in the scriptures, coming to a zenith with the Son of God who corresponds to the word of God. Of course, despite its pictorial and figurative prudence, aesthetic expression is not prohibited in the Bible. Indeed, it is prefigured by God in the project of creation. It is manifest in the “beautiful worship” services in Israel. The prophets resort to dramatic symbols when the word is no longer welcomed. Christ uses various metaphors, first to illustrate a spiritual truth, to then provoke a response from his hearer. The Markan theory of the parable maintains that metaphor is at the service of the word (Mark 4:11–13, 33–34).86 The most extreme aesthetic attitude—sometimes employed by Jesus in this literary genre particular to the New Testament—corresponds to the closed attitude of hearers who “see” and understand the word but do not want to hear the performative word of God which clearly overflows and passes through the parable itself. In this sense, the parable has a merely provisory and self-destructive aesthetic function before the word of God when this latter is heard and accepted. The Bible uses anthropomorphisms to describe a metaphysical world which surpasses human grasp. And finally, Christ might even be designated the “image of the invisible God” (Col

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 224

25-09-2021 09:27:08

Theological Criteria

225

1:15–20), an expression which should not be confused with the Greek conception of the image, but should be understood in the sense of the revelation of God. Jesus is the “imprint” of God, the “first born.” This verse refers just as much to his preexistence as to his incarnation and his resurrection.87 The biblical theme of the “word of God” has been labored over by various theologies oscillating between the historical-canonical word and the kerygmatic word, between a theological hermeneutics and a hermeneutical theology. The written word of God refers to the eternal word, the creative word, and the incarnate word. This word becomes a “linguistic event” each time it is proclaimed and dynamized today by the Holy Spirit. The Relation between Aesthetics and the Word of God Having probed the theological possibilities of aesthetics and the word of God, we are now faced with connecting the two domains. The substance of the word of God triumphs over the futility of earthly aesthetics (Matt. 24:35). Unlike the word, aesthetics evokes emotion or attraction but does not formulate its message. The event of the cross rips apart all superficial aesthetics, bringing us to the heart of our hidden existence. Sin leaves its mark on aesthetics as well; pure beauty will only be attained in eternity. As an eschatological category, a complete aesthetics is out of our reach. And finally, only the word of God is a vector of salvation in Jesus Christ. It brings salvation under the cover of an ambivalent aesthetic because Christology contains both “beautiful” and “ugly” aesthetic aspects. The word of God must, therefore, retain its primary place and must retain priority over aesthetics. This foundation cannot be rebuilt. The subordination of aesthetics to the word of God is imposed from a theological standpoint. But aesthetics is nevertheless at the service of the word. The Sacred and the Holy How can we allow the Gospel to become what it is: a force for salvation impacting social life and cultural transformation? Currently, “religion” in secularized European societies is more or less confined to the private sphere. Yet the missionary proclamation of the universal Gospel opens onto public space. “Privatization” of “religion” bears no inherently negative connotation; on the contrary, it partly corresponds to evangelical ideals (freedom of conscience, freedom of worship, the value of “tolerance”) which are often wrested away (against the churches’ counsel) during the secularization process. But a total closure does not correspond to the lordship of God, the understanding of the Kingdom of God and its (missionary) progress. How can the positive

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 225

25-09-2021 09:27:08

226

Chapter 4

contributions of this “privatization” of “religion” combine with the notion of the one, all-powerful God who does not “tolerate” being excluded from any space whatsoever? How can the public and private spheres be bridged? This question, which we have already examined in several sections, figures among principal challenges of a missiology for the Western context. The responses already given are only partially satisfying; we will thus examine the question more deeply once again in the context of theological criteria. To do so, we return to the origin of this private-public separation, analyzing the classic dichotomy of sacred/profane as a model. We compare the biblical conception of the “Holy God” and “sanctification” with this model. We now turn to the conclusions for the present time and the challenges implied. The Incompatibility of the Two Ideas A Durkheimian hermeneutic cannot be applied as is to the first covenant, and even less to the second. Appearances are deceiving since the elements of Durkheim’s model are present: in the Old Testament, notably, there are rites, symbols, prohibitions, and expressions of the sacred and the profane. We observe a temporary and intermediate sacralization in the old covenant. After the fearful revelation of God at Mount Sinai, the people ask for an “intermediary” who is then designated in the person of Moses. The people cannot bear the appearance of the holy and awesome God, and thus stand at a distance (Ex 20:18–21; Deut 5:23–29, 18:15–18; cf. the “messianic” rereading of Deut 18:15 in Acts 3:22, 7:37). God allows himself to be questioned and accepts this request through the installment of the prophetic ministry. This is the beginning of a provisory and temporary sacred-profane order set up by God himself. In Durkheim’s language we might described this event as follows: the people request distance from the holy God; God grants their request and creates a space in which he integrates and accepts a provisory sacred-profane order. But the sacred objects, times, and spaces which follow do not take on a life of their own and bear only limited signification. They serve to recall the holy presence of God in the past or the present. God himself will intervene to put an end to their instrumentalization when these elements are cut off from their source.88 In the new covenant, most of these temporary elements of the sacred disappear. Resacralization and Desacralization Throughout its history, every Christian tradition was submitted to the pressure of a resacralization of its theology in terms of the first covenant. Here, Durkheim’s concept is relevant: Christians were not spared the pressures to which the Israelites had succumbed. Following the influence of the cultural and religious context, the elements of the provisory sacred of the Old

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 226

25-09-2021 09:27:09

Theological Criteria

227

Testament were reactivated once more, reenchanting the symbols, worship, places of worship, and clergy of Christianity. These tendencies (mostly Roman Catholic and Orthodox) were again attenuated or rejected during the Protestant Reformation. In its essence, Christianity does not lend itself in the least to a sacred/profane dualism. But its environment and underlying human aspirations can transform various theological expressions into such dichotomies. In other words, the essence of Christianity in no way lends itself to a Durkheimian reading, but its expressions tend to be adapted and function in this way. From a biblical viewpoint, it would be better to speak of a perversion. Rather, Judaism and Christianity spark a dynamic of desacralization which can be observed in our postmodern Western society.89 Society would not have entered modernity without the contribution of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Durkheim probably describes a subterranean constant of human culture which has partly influenced Christian traditions and theologies. To return to the essence of scripture, Durkheim’s sacred/profane dichotomy must give way to Christian notions: God/human, holiness of God/human sin, and pure/impure. The constitutive separation and distance of the two elements of Durkheim’s model run contrary to scriptural understanding of the holiness of God. The holy God surpasses his holiness to encounter sinful humanity. This is a completely illogical and ultimately inexplicable theological act. His “expansive” holiness exceeds time and space. He sends his son Jesus to save and sanctify this world and thus shares his primary attribute with humans. Religion in the Private Sphere and the Resacralization of the Human By founding a new social order which separates the public and private sphere, Durkheim’s sacred/profane hermeneutic matrix has become a fact and a cultural norm in the West. Christianity itself has participated in its own desacralization (along with that of God), primarily since the Reformation, through a theological revaluing of the profane sphere (marriage, work, laypersons) and a devaluing of the sacraments. God is everywhere, not only in sacred spaces: this is the message of the Reformers. But the inverse of this affirmation could be that he is also nowhere. The Enlightenment and the process of secularization have amplified and culminated this evolution. “Religion” was placed in the private sphere along with the “idea” of God. This reversal allowed for the inverse revaluing of the state of humanity. Non-biblical political philosophies have all militated for resacralization of the state. In this sense, Durkheim was a fervent “priest” of the French Third Republic. For him, the sacred was necessary and indispensable for social cohesion. A century later, public space is sacralized and private space is desacralized. The state, society and humanity are considered absolute values, while the “concept” of God and religions is devalued. The Western Christian can accept such an order as an intermediary

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 227

25-09-2021 09:27:09

228

Chapter 4

state, a social order which allows her to live her faith, which assures her freedom of religion and of conscience. In any case, she lives a non-sedentary existence which allows her to be bound not only to the visible, but to seek a “heavenly homeland” (Heb 13:14). A “secular theology” is possible because the concept comes from the Bible, where it originally existed among the Hebrew prophets. The prophet resisted the power of the king, thus desacralizing his authority. Later in the New Testament, Jesus separates Caesar from God (Mark 12:17). The temporal order is only provisory, reaching its limits when it claims absolute value. Thus, if a state, “society,” or the “human” is placed in a position of absolute power, the Christian could no longer accept this without dishonoring God and endangering the future of the humans involved. If the political order in which she lives allows her to worship God as an absolute value, she will not question this state’s legitimacy. But she will vigorously oppose all absolutizing of human orders which forbid proclaiming the Gospel. Durkheim was aware of the value of the sacred; this sacred has been displaced from God to humanity. The human person is sacralized. Will Western man, this orphan of a sacred “other” than himself (God, religions, political ideologies), manage to generate enough meaning to write a new page in history? In other words, will man, who henceforth unites the sacred and profane in himself, manage to produce a new symbolic and cultural universe without a creative relation with an “other”? The historian’s response will probably be negative since the history of the West has always evolved to the beat of the profane and the sacred. The Durkheimian sociologist will have a hard time finding a future, since the fusion of the two elements signifies the end of a society. And in any case, the theologian will see in the divinization of humanity another variation of idolatry. Perhaps we have allowed the “idea” of God to be desacralized; this is a fact in the West. But the true and living God transcends humanity. He is holy. The notion of the “sacred” creates spaces and separations; the holiness of God is “expansive” and traverses all human realities.90 Challenges What results does our analysis yield? (a) The sacred/profane dichotomy does not correspond to the overarching design of God. The whole earth belongs to him. (b) Domesticating the religious domain in private and sacred space contradicts the holiness of God and his project of human sanctification. (c) We should nevertheless accept the creation of private and public spheres in the sense of a provisory order of preservation of creation allowing for the communal life of humans regardless of their beliefs.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 228

25-09-2021 09:27:10

Theological Criteria

229

(d) The domestication of “religion” in private space allows for freedom of religion and of conscience. The Gospel supports these values. (e) This order allows an intolerant and dangerous religious expression to become tolerant and peaceful. In this sense, the political order can even take on the function of theological critique. (f) The state should ensure freedom of worship along with its corollary, the freedom of information in public space. These rights should be actively promoted by the state as they concern its long-term survival. Without them, citizens cannot construct a morality and produce the values indispensable for the democratic functioning of the state. The state should support the moral, ideological, philosophical, and religious formation of its citizens, notably by means of educational systems. An excessively restrictive laicity does not allow for free and effective circulation of information. A Christian mission can thus find its place in this public space—which, of course, it shares with other parties in the “religious market.” (g) If evangelical mission has no more place in public space, we can no longer speak of a pluralist and liberal political system. Secularism would thus have transformed into a kind of “secular religion” which is the opposite of secularism. The secular political system is a social order, not an inherent value. These two things should be distinguished. (h) If churches have no way of accessing public space, the political system in this context would thus have mutated into an anti-Christian regime. Christians and churches could no longer respect such a political order since the state would have accorded itself an absolute value. Worship of the true God alone would be in danger and mission could no longer spread its message. “Religion” and “Faith” Chapter 2 was written from the perspective of sociology of religions and a corresponding definition of religion. We have developed the exclusivity of the evangelical message as a theological criterion in a pluralistic world. Possibilities and limits of interreligious dialogue were also discussed. We must now analyze the notion of “religion” from a theological viewpoint. Does “religion” coincide with or oppose evangelical faith? Can Christianity (in its historical forms) be set alongside any other “religion”? What role does “religion” have in the Old and New Testaments? We will try to respond briefly to these interrogations, presenting these challenges tied to a Western contextual theology. In this section, we lay out the positive and negative aspects of the theological critique of “religion,” and a conclusion.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 229

25-09-2021 09:27:10

230

Chapter 4

Positive Aspects of “Religion” How should religious phenomena be situated in the context of theology? What elements constitute religious phenomena? What are the positive aspects of “religion”? (a) Analysis does not allow for flat-out rejection of the term or idea of religion because it can be assimilated to faith in God.91 But it is also true that the Bible privileges other expressions to describe the relation between humanity and God. (b) If a theoretical model integrates religion within culture in general, it could be at least partly explained or justified via humanity’s creational mandate (Gen 1:28). This likewise means that it springs from human creativity. Of course, the cultural mandate cannot enter into conflict with exclusive faith in the “true” God and his laws which protect and develop life. Religion would thus participate in the order of creation and its preservation (Schöpfungs- and Erhaltungsordnung). Consequently, it generates taboos, laws, and an ethos which create community and fortify social cohesion. Man cannot live without such “laws.” (c) Since the “fall” of the first humans (Gen 3), human culture can no longer be approached naively. Like all other human acts, “Religion” can be perverted and influenced by personified evil. In the Apostles’ creed, religion thus exercises a function of preservation in the first article, and a “demoniac” function in the second.92 (d) Human creativity can be a source of religion, but the Bible also evokes “gods,” “spirits,” “demons,” (fallen) “angels,” and other powers in opposition to God. A hierarchy seems to structure this invisible world headed by the “prince of demons,” the “devil” (Matt. 25:41), “Satan” (“Beelzebub,” Mark 3:22–30).93 The Gospels present Jesus as a “thaumaturge” and “exorcist.” Bodily healing, absolution of sins and liberation of spirits often go together. They are the signs of the present reign of God. The Bible only develops a basic demonology which cuts off any systematic construction. But it speaks of an invisible world which must be accounted for without falling into a God/Satan dichotomy, or worse, adoration. These “spirits” “act” in the visible world and can very well “mix” with the scintillating world of religions. (e) Religious phenomena spring from this ambivalent situation between the order of creation, human cultural dynamics, and the “demons” of the invisible world. Missiologist Peter Beyerhaus accounts for the tension between various aspects of religion in creating his tripolar model of non-Christian religions.94 In this model, every believer is subject to three impulses described by scripture: the human, divine,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 230

25-09-2021 09:27:10

Theological Criteria

231

and demonic effects of religion. These effects create significant tension due to their opposition. But they are also partly complementary and support the three biblical affirmations equally. The German missiologist’s schema does not diminish the complexity of “religious” reality and is distinguished as much for equalizing the Gospel with religions as for a total devaluing of religions which are part of God’s general revelation. A positive but critical approach is possible with this model. (f) Some may wonder how we have accepted such a “light” exegesis concerning the two preceding points. Are not biblical notions concerning the invisible world the fruit of an ideological representation of the biblical authors? How can we maintain such theses seventy years after Rudolf Bultmann’s 1941 program of demythologization? This program might say more about the materialist ideology of its time than about the New Testament context. What seems obvious for Western exegesis quickly runs up against viewpoints of non-Western cultures. All these cultures promulgate belief in invisible powers and spirits. This is the case not only for tribal societies, but also for highly developed Asian societies. Christians and theologians coming from these cultures have no trouble with the biblical accounts in question. Missiologist Paul Hiebert draws attention to this overlooked point, this element of our Western ideology which he calls the flaw of the excluded middle.95 For Hiebert, we have lost a dimension of reality between the empirical and the transcendent world. This sphere is inhabited by various spirits who exert a palpable influence on our existence. This “world,” which varies widely according to cultures and religions, is a mirror of our representation of the world which categorically excludes such phenomena because it is based on an Aristotelian dichotomy (the separation between physics and ethics).96 This dualism simply does not correspond to the biblical message. The people of the Old Testament believe that their actions have effects on their body and that sin brings about hardship. There is no separation between nature and morality. We recognize the difficulty involved in approaching these phenomena empirically, but to categorically deny them would be to impose the ideology of our Western world onto the rest of the globe.97 Fundamental Critique of “Religion” Having underlined its positive value and different aspects, we now turn to a fundamental theological critique of all “religion,” including that of “Christianity.” We restrict ourselves to engaging with three authors: Karl Barth, Jacques Ellul, and Jochen Teuffel.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 231

25-09-2021 09:27:11

232

Chapter 4

(a) Karl Barth inverts the positive approach toward “religion” characteristic of the liberal theology of his time, defining it as “incredulity.”98 For Barth, religion is a sort of human justification through works, though he does not categorically reject the term itself. He also uses the term “true religion,”99 but always in a typically dialectical form which ultimately denies “religion” theological existence. The revelation of God must dissolve “religion.” In Barth’s theology, any perspective of a continuity for religious existence cannot stand up when confronted with the revelation of the unique and unpredictable God. Burkhardt positively highlights Barth’s critique of religion for describing the permanent danger posed by human possession of religion and by the divinization of humanity. But he also defends the legitimacy of a Christian religion as a concrete and permanent existence, the work of the Holy Spirit.100 (b) Karl Barth was an inspiration and privileged interlocutor for Jacques Ellul.101 Ellul likewise takes up the fundamental opposition between religion and revelation. For Ellul, Christianity also figures in this former category because it is an ideological movement, a perverted sociological reality of the true revelation of God which he designates with the letter “X.” Christianity cannot be simply a perversion of the “original;” it has sinned worse than any other religion because it has not practiced Christ’s message. It has twisted it into its own opposite, betrayed it by turning it into an ideology, a morality, an ideal. God has become an idea. Ellul finds nothing positive in this expression. While all inflections into “isms” or “-ities” (including Christianity) never manage to maintain and protect the originality, radicality, and consistence of their original source, Christianity’s perversion is even more of an aberration than the others. Ellul prefers to talk of “X,” a letter triply signifying the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, the true church which is the body of Christ, and the Christian faith lived in truth and love. Ellul names the two principal sources of the total subversion of Christianity: first, the Gospel is a scandal which cannot be adapted to society and the human desire for religiosity; second, the “powers of evil” which seduce humanity through their lies. Ellul extends and radicalizes Barth’s theological critique of religion but cannot entirely do away with the notion of Christianity. The phrase The Subversion of Christianity is employed in the book which bears this title both negatively and positively. The “dialectical” method necessitates two antagonistic poles to “produce” a “radical” theological position. But how does this relate to a considered viewpoint, a lasting and real Christian existence beyond the “damnation” of “Christianity” on the one hand and an untenable and radical prophetic position on the other? (c) Jochen Teuffel, a European theologian teaching in Asia, formulates a critique of religion in his missiological approach, in which mission

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 232

25-09-2021 09:27:11

Theological Criteria

233

is primarily proclamation of the name of God. His missiology is an ideological critique of “religion.” For Teuffel, the notion of religion is inherently problematic and contradictory. The idea of a “universal” religion did not exist in Antiquity or the Middle Ages. It is absent from non-European cultures. For Teuffel, declaring Hinduism to be a religion is meaningless because Indian culture is more complex and does not lend itself to analysis by discourse on “religion.” In these non-European spheres, religion is not differentiated from culture. The idea of a “universal” religion which dominates all concrete expressions is a typical product of European culture and humanities. The idea of a “natural” and universal religion opposed to Christian worship emerged from German and British Enlightenment Protestantism. This notion then developed toward a morality without worship, culminating with Schleiermacher in a religion of sentiment which is itself on loan from Neoplatonism: the religious subject unites with the absolute. During the nineteenth century the liberal Protestant side steered this universal definition of religion toward a comparison between Christianity and other “religions” of the world. The nascent science of religions made a duty of “seeking” and “finding” “religion” in all non-Western cultures. The problem is that the people concerned are completely unconscious of their own “religiosity.” Teuffel summarizes “religion” thus: as a scientific category, it is a neo-Protestant invention, an anti-ecclesial ideology, deriving from Neoplatonic thinking. The category of “religion” corresponds to a purely artificial product of the academic world. Mission does not fit into this category because Christianity is not a “religion”; consequently, mission does not lead to a simple change of “religion.” Christian mission receives its legitimation from the proper name of God which it must announce to peoples. It is not possible to attach this name to the expression of a category (“religion”), because it represents an historic event of the revelation of God.102 Teuffel’s missiological program interrogates the category of “religion” as inapplicable outside the European continent. He thus overturns our Eurocentric perspective on “religious” phenomena which, incidentally, are perhaps not even “religious” in nature. The history of the term “religion” in our culture says more about the development of a certain ideology than it does about non-European religious cultural phenomena. CONCLUSION Can we employ the notion of “religion” in a missiology for the Western context? Applying the scientific category of “religion” in a non-Western context requires utmost prudence, precisely because it derives from our Western

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 233

25-09-2021 09:27:11

234

Chapter 4

world. It is can easily degrade into a “religion of the erudite” which produces an impressive number of “religious” studies grounded in its perspective and research objectives. This category suggests a universal notion of “religion” by which different phenomena can be compared. This presupposition stumbles over the self-understanding of non-European cultures for whom such a concept seems completely inappropriate. But it also collides with the biblical message, which knows nothing of such a universal notion of “religion.” Religio finds its proper value in the observation of certain venerations as ethical behavior. These phenomena are visible in nearly all cultures of the world. The French translation of the New Testament and the Vulgate sporadically employ the term “religion.” It can bear a positive meaning if this “religion” binds the human and all her existence to God. The revelation of the unique God in the Old Testament positions God otherwise, radically different from other Gods. His “name” makes the difference. The Gospel and its missionary proclamation thus cannot be assimilated to a “religion,” but the social and historical expressions of Christianity have always tended to abandon the revelation of the name of God, moving toward a “human religion.” Within Christianity, there are forms of religiosity which must be examined alongside the biblical term idolatry. Human realities mean that the Gospel can always be perverted by “human religion.” Since Christianity is not a religion in its essence, it does not compete with “religions.” This would represent submission to a modern ideology of the category of “religion,” which would imply a plurality of religions with Christianity among them. Mission is problematic in the West, which precisely has adopted and assimilated a universal notion of “religion.” This stance puts Christianity (and mission in particular) in an impossible position, decried as intolerant.103 All the negative assimilations bound up with the history of Christianization are evoked for Westerners when confronted with missionary proclamation. The negative “religious” character of Christianization does not allow for the hearing of the original message. The problematic of “religion” encounters the same challenge examined in the previous section. The sacred/profane dichotomy is split in turn by the religion/culture dichotomy. But the two separations are not applicable in cultures other than our own. Scripture, too, rejects such a viewpoint because God will accept neither being confined to one sector of human life, nor the separations established by men. He is holy and cannot tolerate the reduction of this holiness for the sake of humanity. His holiness is directed toward men and the world as a whole. The term “religion” can only be used in a contextual Western theology with utmost care. The term, the scientific category, its ideological use, the history of Christianization as a “perverted religion,” and theological critique leave very little room for its use. But since it is part of our linguistic and

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 234

25-09-2021 09:27:12

Theological Criteria

235

symbolic heritage, we should subvert it through the evangelical message which goes beyond the straitjacket of the “religion” category, rising to a different level in which man can encounter the “name” of God. This sort of Western missiology would have an immense task: to explain the history of the term “religion,” recognize the “religious” abuses of Christianization, and construct a new missionary message upon a provisory “religious” discourse. An historical deconstruction of “religious” is required to bring Westerners back to the essence of Christianity—that is, the Gospel. Immanent and Transcendent “Realities” An Indispensable Notion The philosophies of modernity and postmodernity are characterized by systematic doubt, the end of all metanarratives, nihilism, and deconstructionism. Furthermore, since the “linguistic turn,” we can no longer rely on our verbal communication as a vector of “reality.”104 The loss of the notion of “truth” is coupled with the ruin of “reality.” The Western person henceforth lives in uncertainty and without a horizon to their life because the “reality” seemingly accessible to her senses does not exist. These presuppositions clearly cannot be related to the evangelical message; without “reality,” no salvation is possible for humans because salvation addresses a certain human reality. Neither do they facilitate the personal assumption of salvation because human knowledge is also biased. Without a preexisting theological understanding of the different realities created by God, a missiology for the Western context is useless. With “reality,” neither salvation nor knowledge of salvation are possible or necessary. Various Definitions of “Reality” Throughout this work we have come across differing understandings of “reality” in the humanities. (a) Social reality in the sociology of religions results from a distinction between a manifest reality and a fundamental hidden reality which the researcher must illuminate. This latter, ultimate reality is defined as “society.” (b) Empirical theology is founded on human experience and approaches “lived religion” through a phenomenological understanding of reality. For Husserl, an object of observation can be explained by itself; closer to our own time, we have examined virtual reality as an immaterial and ideal space, a joint product of a technologically advanced society and fantastic human aspiration.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 235

25-09-2021 09:27:12

236

Chapter 4

(c) Virtual and sociological interpretation of “reality” lead to a certain derealization of the world, while “empirical theology” again seems to be concerned with observing facts. The ontological tradition and transcendent approach of theology easily lend themselves to intellectual speculation since a supernatural reality is interpreted. (d) Reformed theology is vigorously closed to all empiricism since from its perspective, the world is under completely gripped by sin, which does not favor approaching it positively. (e) Dialectical theology no longer refers to a theology of creation. (f) In the liberal tradition, only the observation of religious sentiment as a space of theological “reality” remains. We might ask ourselves if the renewed interest for the humanities in theology (“empirical theology”) does not reflect a late awakening to the discipline’s empirical deficit. In any case, Protestant criticism of knowledge of God outside the “reality of the faith” has not allowed for a more positive approach of a certain partial knowledge of God preceding the revelation of his Son in human lives. This hypothesis has perhaps only been tested in the theology of religions and liberation theologies. Protestant theology should consequently leave the field open to catholic approaches. Theological “Realities” Is Protestant theology’s falling back on the “reality of faith” and perhaps again on the “reality of religious sentiment” justified? The response is obviously negative. Working in the domain of practical theology in the perspective of a missiological study, we are constantly confronted with human experiences and the observation of the world. Practical theology is a science of perception, of analysis, and of action. In our model of contextualization, we have included a pole of “context” which ought to draw as near as possible to observed “reality.” Our methodology should necessarily bring us into contact with other “realities” of the world which are situated before and beyond the “reality of the faith.” A provisory missionary goal is precisely a solid understanding of the people of the world (i.e., “reality”). The content of faith is certainly supra-empirical, but it is communicated in an empirical way. Christian hope is transcendent but translates into a certain observable human action on the earth. The “reality of the faith” is nevertheless partially perceptible when the Christian lives “her faith,” that is, through her works and morality. Jesus Christ, the center of the Christian faith, entered human history. These facts prohibit us from reducing Christian faith to the sphere of sentiments and “faith.” We can even affirm that Christian faith reunites empirical aspects (the observation of nature, human experiences, general history, the history of Israel, the historical Jesus of Nazareth, the history of

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 236

25-09-2021 09:27:13

Theological Criteria

237

“salvation”) and phenomenological aspects (hearing of the Gospel, meditation on the resurrected Christ, analytical reading of the Bible) alongside transcendent realities. There are thus different “realities” which theology presents to us: the reality of creation, the historical reality of the chosen people of God, and the reality of the work of Jesus Christ. Christian theology should thus be partially empirical and phenomenological. It should be interested in knowing and doing. Empiricism and phenomenology should recall theology’s task: producing observations of creational and historical reality, bringing them into relation with evangelical truths. Empirical and Theological “Realities” Few Protestant theological models have taken this path. The apparent incompatibility of the realities of “faith” and “empiricism,” in some ways issuing from Reformed heritage and dialectical theology, seem to cut the ground out from under the feet of those who would venture down this trail.105 There have been only a few exceptions. Adolf Schlatter, one of the most significant theologians of the twentieth century, understood his theological method as “empirical.” His dogmatics were partially founded on scripture and on confessional writings, but also upon observation of reality in creation and salvation history.106 Schlatter aimed to surmount the skepticism toward metaphysics widespread in philosophy and theology since Kant, instead emphasizing the possibility of objective knowledge of reality by humans in a broad sense. He saw no contradiction between scriptural theology and his “theology of observation,” since knowledge conformed to reality should necessarily lead to agreement with scripture. The perception of God in works of creation can consequently become an object of theological research. His conception was not widely accepted during his time. Only Wolfhart Pannenberg later exposes Christian theology’s grounding in perceptible reality.107 God revealed his divinity in the history of Jesus, and, therefore, in the reality of the world. If God is truly the supreme reality, he could not be separate from the experiential reality of the world. The role of theology resides in the exposition of theological truths and their connection with reality. Challenges A missiology for the Western culture must necessarily work with the theological criterion of different realities created by God: the reality of creation, the reality of history, the reality of the people of God in the old and new covenants, transcendental and partially hidden divine reality, and the reality of the Christian life. All these realities can be known and are accessible by human senses, otherwise no knowledge of salvation would be possible. Ultimate reality in theology is obviously none other than God himself. All

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 237

25-09-2021 09:27:13

238

Chapter 4

other immanent realities are the work of his creation. A partial knowledge of God is possible on the basis of the works of his creation and his revelation in history. The apostle Paul indicates this possibility of revelation in Romans 1:18–21. This general, partial, and non-specific revelation should not be isolated from the rest of scripture. But without speaking of missiology (which must necessarily analyze the context, i.e., reality), immanent realities are an object of legitimate knowledge in theology. The goal of our study is to renew the confidence of Western humanity in their senses, their reason, their language, their conscience, and their sentiments as reliable organs for perceiving reality. Missiology should also provoke Western theology to draw near to “reality” so that it might recover the essential characteristic of its task, that is, theology as knowing and doing. Salvation in Jesus Christ cannot be proclaimed unless humanity confronts concrete perceptible realities around them. Without this attitude, no proclamation of salvation is possible. We should evolve from a “de-realization” toward a “re-realization” of the world. European humans need stable footing (“reality”) and a horizon (“salvation”).

CONCLUSION Fourteen theological criteria have retained our attention, figuring into the “theology” pole of our contextual theology. These are not exhaustive, but we believe they are pertinent for the European context. Half stem from the three missiologists who have already worked on this topic; the other half are the fruits of our research. We will now offer several observations concerning the transversality of themes before synthesizing and grouping the theological criteria. Transversal Themes (1) Theological anthropology is present both in the section “Discovery of Eschatology” (with Newbigin’s contribution) and in the section “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation,” which both examine human anthropological unity. The overarching aim of God’s salvation corresponds to this unified constitution of the human. God created man in his unity and he also wants to save him in his totality. In the first part of the section “A Postmodern Soteriology,” we took up an anthropological approach to soteriology, indicating the limits and deficits of a purely immanent conception of the human. These three anthropological sections echo the problematic of the contextual characteristic (treated in the section “Inconsistencies of Modernity”).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 238

25-09-2021 09:27:13

Theological Criteria

239

The challenge is to liberate humanity from the autonomous conception of human life (the postulate and impasse of modernity). Autonomous one-upmanship is brought into question. Paradoxically, this conception, weakened by disenchantments and experiences under postmodernity (the “weak” subject), should paradoxically be reinforced once more. Theological resources for confronting this challenge include returning dignity to humanity through the idea of theological anthropological unity against the stratifications of human life, and responding to the need for unity with the overall design of evangelical salvation. (2) Typical dichotomies of our Western world (public/private space, values/ facts) have concerned us much more than the anthropological element, occupying no less than six sections. These widespread separations are first situated in the section “A Social Ethic.” The sections “‘Declericalization’ of Theology” (with the figure of the layperson constructing a bridge between the two spheres) and “Discovery of Eschatology” (in which the Christian eschatological perspective rescues the human from her isolation in private space) suggest going beyond these separations. Christian theology’s incompatibility with a total stratification of our lives is exposed in the section “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation,” along with the anthropological argument and the soteriological plan of God. Two other divisions are examined in the sections “Aesthetics and the Word” and “The Sacred and the Holy” (the sacred/profane dichotomy). From a theological viewpoint, a separation between the word and aesthetics must be maintained, since unlike the sensible, the word of God constitutes a fundamental and primary category. The separation between sacred and profane developed by the sociology of religions bears only a very partial correspondence to the evangelical message, which contradicts it with its conception of the holiness of God. The theological value of these “dichotomies” ought to be carefully weighed. They can only have a relative value in the common life of humanity (public/private space) and for the philosophical classification of different domains (the fact/value dichotomy). Absolute value will be given to the Gospel, which through its scope and content reclaims a place in public space, without which missionary space would be compromised. The difficulty consists in maintaining both the freedom of religions, the right to “believe” or not “believe,” and religious pluralism. The exercise of these rights must happen equitably in both public and private spaces. The right to not be “religious” and the exercise of the “religious” must both be protected together, providing a framework for their adequate development. Understanding the singularity

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 239

25-09-2021 09:27:14

240

Chapter 4

of typically Western separating systems, which do not exist in other cultures, represents another challenge. A theology of the “unity of the world” could connect the philosophical presuppositions of Western and non-Western cultures. The last challenge consists in creating a theological aesthetics through the intermediary of an aesthetic theology in dialogue with an ephemeral contemporary aesthetics. (3) The first three sections of our theological criteria concerned soteriology: at first in a fundamental way (“A Postmodern Soteriology”), then in a particular way (“An Exclusive Message in a Pluralistic World”), and finally in the second half of the section “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation.” We first investigated whether salvation in Christ was truly outmoded and absent from our culture, before exploring the particularity and bearing of the evangelical message. What challenges does this soteriological domain pose? The strong tie between the representation of man and his life project has automatically displaced the conception of autonomous subject onto the free construction of his life (the relation between anthropology and “postmodern soteriology”). His life project is thus only defined by immanence and “freedom.” The theological perspective leads to man’s liberation from this ideal absolute autonomy. This latter has become difficult to live out since it is oppressed by the tyranny of success and the imperative of multiple possibilities. Man’s “happiness” is confined to his resources alone. (4) A singular observation merits our attention: two sections have conjointly addressed western dichotomies and theological anthropology (cf. points 1 and 2 in this section). Anthropology combines with eschatology in the section “Sin: the Primary Obstacle,” and with soteriology in the section “Uniqueness, Exclusivity, Tolerance.” The correlation of anthropological, soteriological, and eschatological doctrines seems particularly promising in terms of criteria for critical analysis of the cultural structure of our European societies. We propose an absolute theological legitimacy which relativizes such divisions and proposes overcoming and surpassing them. The challenges of this last point are placed in correlation with the three theological doctrines and their relation with contemporary human conceptions of life. Bringing these three doctrines together produces a considerable contribution of unity in response to the complexity of the divided world and to a human torn between various sectors of her life.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 240

25-09-2021 09:27:14

Theological Criteria

241

Bringing the Theological Criteria Together We have tried to group the fourteen sections into eight principal theological criteria. (1) The criterion of preconditions encompasses four sections. The section “An historical Christology” should be the center and principal critical criterion of a missiology for the European context. The historical person of Christ is the condition and foundation of every missiology developed in any context. Any project of contextualization must be measured by Christ and his work revealed in scripture. The next criterion recalls chapter 3. “The Imperative of a New Contextualization” cannot be merely a contextual characteristic, but must also be a theological criterion because contextualization corresponds to a foundational element of the missionary mandate. The evangelical message is proclaimed in a specific framework, which demands a real correlation between the message and the context. After the Christological and contextual criteria comes the scriptural element. The section “Aesthetics and the Word” contains two criteria. The word of God is extracted from this article along with aesthetics, figuring into preconditions because of the priority and weight of the word of God as a foundational and critical principle. The word of God produces faith and is the biblical basis of the missionary message. Like the Christological criterion, the weight of the scriptural criterion calls for a critical function as a norma normans. Consequently, these two criteria are also defined as an authoritative element allowing for the nourishment and correction of the contextualization process. The previous section of this chapter, “Immanent and Transcendent Realities,” raises preconditions in the rubric as an empirical criterion. This is an indispensable criterion since a “Western” missiology must address a certain “reality,” or else man can neither perceive, nor understand, nor believe the evangelical message. The various “realities” created by God form the base and stage upon which the “drama” of salvation108 takes place, and upon which the assurance of salvation is constituted. A missiology for the Western context should first reconstruct the human person’s confidence in her senses and perceptions. Without real and receptive human “reality,” no evangelical proclamation is possible or plausible. Christological, contextual, scriptural, and empirical criteria thus form the first group of preconditions. (2) Following directly from the preconditions, six theological sections can be brought together. The fundamental criteria include soteriological criteria

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 241

25-09-2021 09:27:14

242

Chapter 4

(“A Postmodern Sociology,” “An Exclusive Message in a Pluralistic World,” and “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation”), a spiritual criterion (“A Christian Spirituality”), the ecclesiological criterion (“A Living Community”), and the criterion of theological teaching (“A Missionary Theology”). The soteriological criteria spring from Christology (cf. “A Postmodern Soteriology,” “An Exclusive Message in a Pluralistic World,” and the second part of “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation”). The Postmodern human seeks to base themselves on an anthropology and human ethic denuded of all theological connotation. This self-construction proves difficult for the autonomous subject who, despite herself, must find a solution liberating her from the weight of the enormous offer of “freedom,” from existential uncertainty and the domination of ethics over her daily life. The rich New Testament vocabulary of salvation offers multiple options of contextualization for rendering the work of Jesus Christ pertinent to the twentyfirst century. For Western man, the notion of sin is certainly the most difficult obstacle to understanding the Christian message. But it can become plausible for modern man, all while avoiding excessive moralization and a minimization of biblical anthropology. An exclusive message seems to darken the preaching of the Good News in postmodernity since all exclusivity seems suspect. Soteriology must, therefore, find a path between ambient pluralism (with relativism as its corollary) and the particular message of Jesus of Nazareth. The spiritual criterion (“A Christian Spirituality”) interrogates the dynamic of faith in an individual perspective, while the ecclesiological criterion (“A Living Community”) lays out the collective perspective of this relation with God. The spiritual vitality of every Christian is indispensable, without even speaking of promoting the missionary mandate. Such fervor among the bearers of the Gospel naturally integrates a missionary dynamic without the need to mention the word. The place of the church is central in the collective perspective. Jesus assigned it its missionary order. The zeal of the church renders credible or hinders the proclamation of the Gospel. A living community can become a plausible apologetic organism. Humans might be ready to listen after having allowed it a certain legitimacy. The spiritual vitality of the Christian and the church pose the question of their visibility and their sanctification. The last criterion in our group is focused on theological teaching (“A Missionary Theology”). Reforming the studies of theology in Europe should allow a much more notable place for missiology. The goal of such reform should render theology more missionary: that is, theology should draw closer to the New Testament model, which displays a stronger connection between theology and mission; theological teaching should respond more to present

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 242

25-09-2021 09:27:15

Theological Criteria

243

and urgent missiological challenges; theology can allow missiology to revitalize it so that it becomes “missionary” at its very core. This means that it must be able to give an account of its evangelical message. The first three soteriological criteria cited concern the message of mission; the spiritual and ecclesiological factors are directed at the bearers of the evangelical message; and the last criterion proposes a reworking of theological teaching. (3) The eschatological criterion is represented by the section “Discovery of Eschatology,” and partially by the section “Immanent and Transcendent Realities.” Deprived of his transcendent horizon and the creative tension between immanence and transcendence, the Western human sinks in despair, drowned by materialism. The dream of ideologies is no longer possible; retreat into private space is inevitable. The eschatological perspective gives a new theological outlook and inspires new hope. (4) The section “‘Declericalization’ of Theology” indicates an unaccomplished programmatic point of Protestant Reformers. “Missionary strength” is rarely found among the “professionals” of the faith but is more common among laypersons; this is demonstrable through several examples in the history of missions. The criterion of laicity is pertinent because the layperson lives in public and private space. She can function as a bridge between the two spheres. (5) Social ethics, which has almost exclusively absorbed the question of the public/private dichotomy, is treated in the sections “A Social Ethic” and “The Sacred and the Holy.” In announcing “evangelical truth” (Newbigin) and in a theology of the reign of God (Bosch), both the nostalgia of a “Christian society” and isolation of Christians in the private sphere must be avoided. The tension between a right to separate spaces and the Gospel’s “sequestering” in closed space will not be evacuated by any theological model. (6) The anthropological criterion is situated in the first part of the section “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation.” The sections “Discovery of Eschatology” and “A Postmodern Soteriology” contribute, enriching this criterion to a lesser extent. Human dignity is endangered by excessive stratification of life in the West. Various human needs and questions and the deficits of their ethical models favor a new and promising encounter with evangelical values. (7) Though in delicate relation to the aesthetic criterion, the scriptural criterion nevertheless cannot do away with an aesthetic theology and a theological aesthetics (cf. “Aesthetics and the Word”).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 243

25-09-2021 09:27:15

244

Chapter 4

(8) The section “‘Religion’ and ‘Faith’” introduces the central challenge of the theology of religions. The question of interreligious dialogue already prepared us for this examination. But perhaps there are even more difficult tasks to accomplish, since the very concept of “religion” is bound to Western history. The notion must be situated in its context and approached critically. Is this idea still operative from a biblical viewpoint and in a non-Western perspective? Nevertheless, we cannot entirely abandon this term in favor of the biblical expression “faith” because of its deep roots in European history. We have now gathered the fourteen theological criteria into eight groups (see figure 4.1): ( 1) The criterion of preconditions; (2) Fundamental criteria; (3) The eschatological criterion; (4) The criterion of laicity; THEOLOGICAL CRITERIA OF THE THREE MISSIOLOGISTS A Missionary Theology (+) “De-clericalization” of theology (#) Discovery of Eschatology (§) An Historical Christology (*) A Social Ethic (¤) A Christian Spirituality (+) A Living Community (+) OTHER THEOLOGICAL CRITERIA A Postmodern (~) soteriology (+) An exclusive message (+) in a pluralistic world (¢) Human Unity (~) and the Overarching Goal of Salvation (+) Aesthetics (=) and the Word (*) The Sacred and the Holy (¤) “Religion” and “Faith” (¢) Immanent (*) and Transcendant (§) “Realitites” The Imperative of a New Contextualization (*) 1) Preconditions: * 2) Fundamental criteria: + 3) Eschatological criteria: § 4) The Criterion of Laicity: # 5) Criteria of social ethics: ¤ 6) Anthropological criteria: ~ 7) Aesthetic criteria: = 8) Criteria of a theology of religion: ¢

Figure 4.1  Fourteen Theological Criteria Combined into Eight Primary Groups.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 244

25-09-2021 09:27:16

Theological Criteria

245

( 5) The criterion of social ethics; (6) The anthropological criterion; (7) The aesthetic criterion; and (8) The criterion of a theology of religions.  Together these form the “theology” pole of our contextual model. The “theological” pole is henceforth circumscribed in relation to the five (geographic and demographic, preconditions, empirical, historical, and philosophical) criteria of the contextual pole. The correlation between the two poles was only very partially examined at the end of each section in chapter 3 and this chapter; the next chapter will take up this task in earnest. NOTES 1. Bosch, Dynamique, 660. 2. Cf. the section “Vers une théologie missionnaire” in Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 21–24. 3. Bosch, Dynamique, 658–659. 4. Martin Kähler, Schriften zur Christologie und Mission, 7th ed. (Munich: Kaiser, 1971) (1st ed. 1908), 190; cited in Bosch, Dynamique, 27–29. 5. This approach can be associated with Bosch’s (“dimensional aspect of missiology”) and Spindler’s approaches (“responsible missiology”); cf. Bosch, Dynamique, 660–663; Zorn, Missiologie, 91–100. 6. In this respect we believe that Büker’s description is true not only of the Germanophone context: cf. Büker, “Europa,” 199. 7. This expression was used and promoted in the world of Protestant missions beginning with the 1954 General Assembly of the World Council of Churches at Evanston. Cf. L’Espérance chrétienne dans le monde d’aujourd’hui: message et rapports de la IIe Assemblée du COE, Evanston 1954 (Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1955); Hendrik Kraemer, Théologie du laïcat (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1966); Jean-François Zorn, “Laïc, Laïcat,” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie, 181–184. 8. Newbigin, Foolishness, 141–144; idem, “Can the West Be Converted?” 7; Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 43. 9. “We are in a situation analogous to one about which the great Reformers complained. The Bible has been taken out of the hands of the layperson; it has now become the professional property not of the priesthood but of the scholars.” Newbigin, Foolishness, 142. 10. Cf. the eschatological conceptions of the four representatives of pietism (Spener, Bengel, and Blumhardts, father and son). The exegetical work of Oscar Cullmann in the domain of eschatology decisively influenced German missiologists Walter Freytag and Karl Hartenstein. Cf. the 1941 article by Cullmann, “Eschatologie und Mission im Neuen Testament,” in Vorträge und Aufsätze 1925–1962, dir. Karlfried Fröhlich (Tubingen/Zurich: Mohr (Siebeck)/Zwingli, 1966), 348–360.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 245

25-09-2021 09:27:17

246

Chapter 4

11. Bosch, Dynamique, 667. 12. Newbigin, Foolishness, 134–137; idem, “Can the West Be Converted?” 7. 13. Gisbert Greshake, “Eschatologie,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 396– 400; citation 397. 14. Newbigin, “Can the West Be Converted?” 7. For the history of eschatology in theology, cf. ibid., and Bosch, Dynamique, 667–674. 15. A term borrowed from Ernst Troeltsch. 16. Bosch, Dynamique, 671–682. 17. Newbigin, Foolishness, 134–137. 18. Zorn, “La contextualisation,” 187. 19. We are consciously short-circuiting a complex debate here. But addressing this debate is not our goal. We are working from a Protestant viewpoint, a critical approach toward culture. We also hold the principle of the claritas of scripture despite the different aspects of New Testament Christology. 20. We first prioritized the context before moving to theological criteria, even though the affirmations of scripture must always win over the particularism of a contextual approach, simply due to the quasi-general absence of contextual reflection concerning Western culture. 21. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 343–345. 22. For the search for a Christian social order through a Christian doctrine of freedom, cf. Newbigin, Foolishness, 137–141; idem, “Can the West Be Converted,” 6. See also the section “La mission comme éthique sociale” in Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 25–26. 23. We treat the two supplementary criteria of Newbigin and Bosch in this same section: the critique of the notion of “denominationalism” by Newbigin and the demand for an ecumenical missiology by Bosch. According to these two authors, the existence of innumerable Christian denominations is the institutional expression of a privatized religion. Newbigin, Foolishness, 144–146; idem, “Can the West Be Converted?” 7; Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 42ff. 24. Newbigin, Foolishness, 137. 25. Ibid, 19. 26. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 339–341. 27. Cf. C. A. Keller and Denis Müller, “Spiritualité,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 1472–1490, for a definition of Protestant spirituality. 28. Jean-François Zorn, “La foi protestante à l’heure des nouvelles demandes de spiritualités,” Foi et Vie XCVI no. 5 (December 1997) 57–71. 29. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 44. 30. Newbigin, Foolishness, 149–150. 31. Bosch, “Croire en l’avenir,” 44. Cf. Blough, “Pluralisme et vérité,” 9–11. 32. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 345–353. 33. Bernard Ugeux, “Évangéliser et guérir. Quel salut pour aujourd’hui?” in Appel à témoins. Mutations sociales et avenir de la mission chrétienne, dir. Geneviève Comeau and Jean-François Zorn (Paris: Cerf, 2004, 89–117). 34. The extent of this suffering is a question which has spurred several possible responses. We hold to the interpretation that human dignity is not completely attained by sin.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 246

25-09-2021 09:27:18

Theological Criteria

247

35. It is beyond the scope of our study to address the New Testament notion of adoption, which is an oft-neglected aspect of soteriology. 36. Eberhard Jüngel, “La liberté, trait fondamental de la conception réformatrice de l’existence,” in Luther et la Réforme 1519–1526, coll. Questions de civilisation (Paris: Le temps, 2000), 77–90. 37. Jean-Daniel Causse opposes the representation of the self-grounded individual to the singularization which is preceded by naming. He denounces the pseudoself-definition of modern man because individualization can only germinate from a debt toward those who gave us life and those who named us for the first time. JeanDaniel Causse, “Individualisation et singularisation. Approche anthropologique et théologique,” in Comeau and Zorn, Appel à témoins, 45–59. 38. Jean-Daniel Causse, “La cure psychanalytique: un salut profane?” Études théologiques et religieuses 83 no. 3 (2008) 377–387. 39. Human rights vs. the value of tradition, for example, in cases of female circumcision, or Islamic legislation vs. Western legislation. 40. “The memory of the Shoah should continually be revived in our national conscience and in the universal human conscience of men as the indelible mark of absolute Evil.” Cf. Simone Weil and Hubert Falco, “Nous sommes allés à Auschwitz parce que le mal n’est pas mort. La mémoire de la Shoah doit être sans cesse ravivée dans nos consciences,” Le Monde, 29 January 2010, 16. 41. The domination of the question of ethics and ethical worries for postmodern man is produced by an overaccentuated ethical autonomy and an ethics of freedom. Cf. the section “The Dominance of Aesthetics and Ethics” in chapter 3. 42. Hans-Georg Link et al., “Versöhnung,” Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, 1st ed. (Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971), 1302–1313. 43. Horst Seebass, “Gerechtigkeit,” Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, 502–509. 44. Wilhelm Mundle et al., “Erlösung,” Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, 258–272. 45. Herwart Vorländer, “Vergebung,” Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, 1st ed. (Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971), 1263–1267. 46. Cf. René Girard, Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World, trans. Stephen Bann and Michael Metteer (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1978). 47. Cf. Jacques Arènes et al. (dir.), Réinventer la culpabilité (Paris: BuchetChastel, 2009). 48. This phrase is borrowed from philosopher Luc Ferry, L’homme-Dieu ou le Sens de la vie (Paris: Grasset, 1996). 49. Causse, “La cure psychanalytique,” 386–387. 50. Cf. Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi, Theory and History of Literature vol. 10 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984). A metanarrative is a message which encompasses and orders the various elements of human experience into an ideology which makes sense. 51. This is true not only for various political and cultural realities, but also for churches, and notably Protestantism, which is a “divided religious phenomenon.” Jean Baubérot, “Pluralisme,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 1158.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 247

25-09-2021 09:27:18

248

Chapter 4

52. Harold A. Netland, Dissonant Voices: Religious Pluralism and the Question of Truth, Grand Rapids/Leicester: Eerdmans/Apollos, 1991); Rutter, “Une analyse des fondements théologiques des déclarations,” 254–262. 53. Blough, “Pluralisme et vérité,” 5–7. 54. Burkhardt, Das gute Handeln, 42–47. 55. Jean-Claude Basset and Pierre Gisel, “Religion et religions,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 1311. 56. Cf. Newbigin, Truth to Tell. 57. Basset and Gisel, “Religion et religions,” 1312. 58. Burkhardt, Das gute Handeln, 52–54. 59. Cf. the typologies of Jean-Claude Basset, Le dialogue interreligieux. Chance ou déchéance de la foi, coll. Cogitatio Fidei no. 197 (Paris: Cerf, 1996), or of JeanFrançois Zorn, “Introduction. Essai de typologie des interprétations chrétiennes des autresreligions et leurs implications missiologiques,” in L’alterité religieuse, un défi pour la mission chrétienne xviie–xxe siècles, dir. Françoise Jacquin and Jean-François Zorn (Paris: Karthala, 2001), 11–29. 60. Patrik Fridlund, “Mobile Performances. A Philosophical Account of Linguistic Undecidability as Possibility and Problem in the Theology of Religion,” doctoral thesis defended at the University of Lund in 2007. 61. Instead of fighting the confessional status quo of churches as originally intended, the ecumenical project ultimately buried it. The search for ecumenical peace can also hamper theological creativity. 62. Gilbert Vincent, “Églises et religion civile. Enjeux et limites de l’oecuménisme,” in L’Europe à la recherche de son âme, 173–200. 63. Ulrike Bechmann, “Abraham – Beschwörungsformel oder Präzisierungsquelle? Bibeltheologische und religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum AbrahamParadigma im interreligiösen Dialog,” habilitation thesis defended at the University of Bayreuth in 2004; idem, “Abraham und Ibrāhīm. Die Grenzen des AbrahamParadigmas im interreligiösen Dialog,” Münchener theologische Zeitschrift 58 no. 2 (2007) 110–126; idem, Abraham und die Anderen. Kritische Untersuchung zur Abraham-Chiffre im interreligiösen Dialog, coll. Bayreuther Forum TRANSIT— Kulturwissenschaftliche Religionsstudien no. 5 (Berlin: LIT, forthcoming). 64. See also Rémi Braque, “Pour en finir avec trois trios,” in Du Dieu des chrétiens et d’un ou deux autres (Paris: Flammarion, 2008), 13–47. 65. We might make distant reference to Husserl’s philosophy of phenomenology as a search for certainty. Cf. Leszek Kolakowski, Husserl et la recherche de la certitude (Lausanne: L’Âge d’homme, 1991). 66. This is an expression for the church, the “body of Christ,” in which Christ is present by the Spirit. 67. The “heart” names an element neglected by theological anthropology to the present day, even if Pietism developed an informal theology “of the heart” and Schleiermacher accorded enormous importance to the affects. 68. Hans Walter Wolff, Anthropologie des Alten Testaments, 5th ed. (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1990), 25–95; André Wénin et al., “Âme-coeur-corps,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 24–33.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 248

25-09-2021 09:27:19

Theological Criteria

249

69. Cf. the structural role of the sêmeia in the Gospel of John. 70. Walter Bauer, “sôzô,” Wörterbuch zum NT, 6th ed., 1591–1593. 71. Cf. Helmut Burkhardt, “Rechtfertigung und Heiligung, eine biblisch-dogmatische Verhältnisbestimmung,” Jahrbuch für evangelikale Theologie 20 (2006) 25–46. 72. Cf. Paul’s insistance on the body as the culmination of the ethical process, for example, in the cardinal passage in Rom 12:1. 73. Theological traditions diverge here according to optimistic or pessimistic concepts of sanctification. 74. Cf. both aspects in 1 Pet. 1:3 (the regeneration of the Christian as the present aspect of salvation) and 1 Pet. 1:5 (the accomplishment of salvation as its future aspect). 75. Wolfgang Steck conceived his practical theology based on this separation between public and private space, with all its inconveniences and advantages. Wolfgang Steck, Praktische Theologie, vol. 1 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2000). 76. Philippe Nemo thinks that Old Testament prophecy was a systemic precursor to a secular political system: the prophet opposed the power of the king. Nemo, Occident, 78. 77. For a constructive Protestant approach to the image, cf. Jérôme Cottin, Le regard et la Parole. Une théologie protestante de l’image, coll. Lieux théologiques no. 25 (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994). 78. Jean Zumstein, L’évangile selon saint Jean (13–17), coll. Commentaire du NT IVb, 2nd series (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2007), 290–293. Cf. aussi Frédéric Rognon, “La foi au risque du doute,” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 88 no. 1 (JanuaryMarch 2008) 21–53, particularly 35–38. 79. Ulrich H. J. Körtner, “Zur Einführung: Hermeneutik und Ästhetik. Zur Bedeutung einer theologischen Ästhetik für die Lehre vom Wort Gottes,” in Hermeneutik und Ästhetik. Die Theologie des Wortes im multimedialen Zeitalter, dir. Ulrich H. J. Körnter (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchner, 2001), 2. 80. Cf. Burkhardt, Das gute Handeln, 59–62; Werbieck, “Trugbilder oder Suchbilder?”, 10–11. 81. Samuel Bénétreau, La première épître de Pierre (Vaux-sur-Seine: Édifac, 1984), 144–146. 82. Körtner, “Hermeneutik und Ästhetik,” 4. 83. This section has followed Markus Bockmühl et al., “Wort Gottes,” Evangelisches Lexikon für Theologie und Gemeinde, vol. 3, 2186–2188. 84. Gibellini, Panorama, 83. 85. Ibid., 63–91; Jean-Yves Lacoste, “Herméneutique,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 527–531. 86. More precisely, I am referring to the language of change. 87. Helmut Merklein, “Christus als Bild Gottes im Neuen Testament,” in Die Macht der Bilder, coll. JBTh, vol. 13 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1999), 53–75. 88. Cf. the astonishing example of Hezekiah, king of Judah: he destroys the bronze serpent of Moses, an object charged with meaning, because it is associated with idolatrous practices. God does not oppose this act (2 Kgs 18:4). 89. Cf. Jacques Ellul, “La désacralisation par le christianisme et la sacralisation dans le christianisme,” in La subversion du christianisme, coll. Empreintes, Paris,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 249

25-09-2021 09:27:19

250

Chapter 4

Seuil, 1984, p. 65–83; cf. The Subversion of Christianity, coll. Jacques Ellul Legacy Series (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011), 52–68. 90. Philippe, Occident, 78–82; cf. Graham Maddox, Religion and the Rise of Democracy (London/New York: Routledge, 1996); Willaime, Sociologie des religions, 21–22. 91. Cf. appendix B. 92. On points b and c, cf. Wolfgang Trillhaas, Dogmatik (Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1972), 225–233. 93. This structure is visible in Ephesians 6:12. For the first two of the four powers of the invisible world listed, Paul emplous terms which bear a double meaning: “principalities” and “powers” are applied both to political power and for the world of spirits. Cf. Walter Bauer, “archê,” “exousia,” Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 6th ed., 225, 564. 94. Pet.er Beyerhaus, “Theologisches Verstehen nichtchristlicher Religionen,” Kerygma und Dogma 35, no. 2 (1989) 106–127. 95. Hiebert, Anthropological Reflections, 189–201. 96. Once again, our remarks concerning persons “without religion” and “alternative beliefs” in chapter three evoke a resurgence or stability of “superstition” in Europe. In the section “A Postmodern Soteriology” in the present chapter, we evoked the “secularization” of Christian salvation via an immanent ideology of well-being which is far from closed to the idea of “spirits” or invisible “forces and powers.” Are these powers a secondary effect of an absolute Cartesian dualism and a strict Aristotelian dichotomy? Would not the “flaw of the excluded middle” thus also operate as a concept for interpreting Western culture? 97. Jochen Teuffel, Mission als Namenszeugnis. Eine Ideologiekritik in Sachen Religion (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 19–31. 98. Karl Barth, “Religion als Unglaube,” in Die kirchliche Dogmatik, I/2, § 17, 324–356. 99. Ibid., 377. 100. Helmut Burkhardt, Ein Gott in allen Religionen? Wiederkehr der Religiosität. Chance und Gefahr, coll. TVG Orientierung, 2nd ed. (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1993), 12–15, 30–32. 101. Frédéric Rognon, Jacques Ellul: une pensée en dialogue (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2007), 237–239. 102. Teuffel, Mission, 111–138, 161–187. 103. Ibid., 176. 104. The “linguistic turn” refers to a school of American history active in the late 1960s, according to which historical research should primarily focus on language. Reality is always mediated by discourse. The historian only attains a discursive representation of reality. History as a discipline consequently turns into a literary genre. 105. Regarding Reformed theology, we must nuance this statement since John Calvin developed the notion of general revelation, allowing for a certain knowledge of God. The famous dispute between Karl Barth and Emil Brunner shows this struggle between a dialectical theology concentrated solely on the revelation of Jesus

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 250

25-09-2021 09:27:20

Theological Criteria

251

Christ (Barth) and the partial legitimacy of a general revelation of God expressed in a theologia naturalis (Brunner). 106. While an important theologian, Adolf Schlatter worked in the shadow of liberal and dialectical theologians. 107. Wolfhart Pannenberg (dir.), Offenbarung als Geschichte, 2nd ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963); idem, Wissenschaftstheorie und Theologie (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1973), 329–348. 108. Cf. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: John Knox, 2005).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 251

25-09-2021 09:27:20

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 252

25-09-2021 09:27:20

Chapter 5

A Contextual Theology for Europe

INTRODUCTION We now come to the heart of our scientific work: developing a correlation between the five contextual and eight theological criteria. The product of this encounter between “context” and “scripture” poles will form a contextual theology for Europe. We emphasize that this is one proposition, our own, with the knowledge that other criteria have not been recognized or retained in our study. We think that major elements of our study will also prove relevant to the larger context of the global West. We have described theological criteria in response to the Western cultural context and its characteristics. But to construct a critical contextualization, the scriptures cannot simply be used as a response to a human or cultural need; in this case, scripture would be reduced to the level of context. It could no longer function as a divine message or deliver the effects of its contents. This sort of non-critical construction would end up with a human mirage of the biblical message. By contrast, critical contextualization should integrate elements derived from the Good News in opposition to the ambient culture, confronting Westerners with their real state before God. At first, this prophetic kind of contextualization will appear counterproductive for contemporary culture. But it will be worthwhile in the end because prophecy also implies a promise of salvation, and, therefore, of life. To accomplish its goal, the critical side of the word of God will be emphasized more in this chapter than in previous chapters. We will consider the question of continuity and discontinuity in critical contextualization one last time. It is also important to cast a glance at the history of contextualization. Certainly, informal expressions have existed since the beginning of Christianity (cf. “Formal and Informal 253

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 253

25-09-2021 09:27:20

254

Chapter 5

Contextualization”). It would be unjust to ignore this, even if our work is not historically focused. The rediscovery of Europe and the West as missionary space will dovetail with this same secondary historical interest. We will develop the foundation (“An Empirical and Hermeneutic Missiology”) and the two essential lines of our contextual theology (“A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis” and “A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God”). Their mutual incompatibility will be overcome through the contribution of pneumatology (“A Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology”). CRITICAL CONTEXTUALIZATION: BETWEEN CONTINUITY AND DISCONTINUITY It is worth stating once more exactly how we situate our critical contextualization model within the culture-Gospel relationship. We are constructing a missiology for and not of the European/Western cultural context, demonstrating an intentional and biblically indicated distance between culture and Gospel. We are formulating a critical contextualization, indicating the supreme authority of the Gospel in relation to culture. Based on these theological and methodological premises, we might think that our model works in a discontinuous mode. However, if we examine the methodological framework of our study, we see that in fact it is built on continuity. We place the construction of the “context” pole (chapters 2 and 3) before the “theology” pole (chapter 4). This amounts to inverting the theological value of the two poles. Moreover, the architecture of chapter 4 is conceived as responding to the contextual characteristics. This procedure confirms the mutation of our initial methodological position. We could thus see a contradiction between continuity and discontinuity at the very center of our work. This tension probably exists in every theological model. Of course, we range Roman Catholic theologies of redemption and assumption, the missiological model of inculturation, and propositions of the Catholic magisterium concerning the re-evangelization of Europe more on the side of cultureGospel continuity. We might similarly locate certain Protestant approaches, notably Paul Tillich’s theology of correlation, process theologies, and perhaps even the postliberal schools of George Lindbeck and Stanley Hauerwas.1 On the opposite end of the spectrum,2 we place Reformed theologies, the missiological model of contextualization (according to Jean-François Zorn’s definition), dialectical theology with its monism of revelation (some might say “positivism” of Revelation, Offenbarungspositivismus), and perhaps even theologians associated with Radical Orthodoxy.3

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 254

25-09-2021 09:27:20

A Contextual Theology for Europe

255

No theological school limits itself to being locked in an absolute logic of continuity or discontinuity. Even in the case of a total theological discontinuity, the possibility of this theology’s reception by its hearer must be addressed. Continuity thus exists at least in the process of communication. There is a continuity between discontinuous theology and the perception of this latter. In the case of theological models invoking continuity, the doctrine of sin restrains the desire for the absolute openness of a chain of continuity between culture and Gospel. Our critical contextualization model (which draws its inspiration from Protestantism) works within a discontinuous mode, distinguishing itself from inculturation and maintaining a necessary distance from a world estranged from the holy God. But this discontinuous mode is nevertheless only relative since it is founded on human capacities to perceive a general and partial revelation of God in nature and history. The observed context of the world corresponds to God’s first question posed to man. Of course, this observation must be surpassed through the supreme and specific revelation of Jesus Christ. But general revelation can justify the attention we give to the “context” pole and the opportunity of man’s partial movement toward God grounded in the context. Our model of critical contextualization of relative discontinuity is inspired by a theology of creation,4 by John Calvin’s concept of general and special revelation, by the approaches of Adolf Schlatter and Emil Brunner, and by phenomenological philosophy.5 FORMAL AND INFORMAL CONTEXTUALIZATION While this work is based on formal contextualization, a notion dating from the 1970s, we should not ignore that contextualization—that is, the correlation of the form, content, and doctrine of the evangelical message with a precise culture—has always existed under other names, whether formally or informally. We have not emphasized this historical side, which would require additional work. Nevertheless, we would like to present several historical examples to avoid giving the impression that the concept of contextualization marked its beginning as a fact. (1) A cultural interaction between historical events and the written tradition is already indicated by various biblical terms derived from existing languages and different New Testament theological concepts responding to the culture of those addressed.6 (2) The second century apologists defended the Christian faith against pagan doctrines, but their arguments emphasized certain elements of commonality with pagan philosophy.7

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 255

25-09-2021 09:27:20

256

Chapter 5

(3) Greek culture certainly influenced Judaism, then Christianity, though the extent of this influence is still a subject of contemporary discussion.8 This Greek contribution also allowed for a cultural transfer in the opposite direction—a communication of the Gospel in the Greek world.9 (4) During European Christianization, the reception of Christianity by different tribes varied with the time and context. In no case ought we to imagine a passive reception by the host culture. As with Hellenism, the Germanic contribution considerably transformed Christianity between the fourth and eighth centuries, with some historians noting a “Germanization” of Christianity during the high Middle Ages.10 (5) We observe precursors to contextualization during the contemporary era in France: for example, on the Roman Catholic side, the work of Godin and Daniel (1943) with their will to bring the Gospel to the innumerable laborers of the era huddled on the periphery of major cities; on the Protestant side, we might cite Jacques Ellul who fought for Christians’ real presence in society, which is a sort of “critical contextualization.”11 EUROPE AS MISSIONARY SPACE The rediscovery of Europe as missionary space happened only reluctantly over the last several decades. We will briefly trace this discovery in official documents of the Roman Catholic church (1), global missionary conferences in the ecumenical (2) and evangelical (3) movements, and the appearance of the idea of a “missionary country” in certain European contexts (4). (1) The “mission crisis” came to both Catholicism and Protestantism in the 1950s, following decolonization and the weakening of the European cultural model. Roman Catholic missiology had to take leave of the Eurocentric missionary consciousness which dominated for centuries. Vatican II left its mark on this church and on its definition of mission in particular. A new understanding of the church cleared the way for new implications. The (Roman Catholic) church understands itself as a sacrament for the world enacted in local churches. The entire “people of God” as well as all local churches are henceforth bearers of missionary vocation as specified in the second-to-last conciliary document Ad gentes. The conciliary reception concerning mission on the European continent is visible in the documents of the Council of Episcopal Conferences in Europe (given the acronym CCEE reflecting its Latin title), founded in 1971, and the synods of European bishops in Rome (1991 and 1999). Missiologist Arnd Bünker has analyzed these documents and emphasizes the balance, firstly, between an ideal of Christian restoration (the re-catholicization of the continent) and a European missionary realism in the CCEE, and secondly, between the affirmation of the “new evangelization”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 256

25-09-2021 09:27:20

A Contextual Theology for Europe

257

(a theme dear to John Paul II) and a call to rediscover the European roots in the Roman synods.12 Bünker concludes that local churches hardly develop appropriate contextual theologies. “Constantinian” ecclesiology has apparently held onto some of its rights.13 (2) The third plenary conference of the Conseil international des missions (CIM) in Tambaram, India no longer distinguished between “old” and “young” churches; both bear full responsibility for the proclamation of the Gospel. The conference even recognized regions in the territory of “old” churches which must become the object of a new Gospel proclamation. Notwithstanding, the priority remains “non-Christian” countries. On Europe as a mission field, the fifth worldwide missionary conference in Willingen (1952) pulled back after the discussion at Tambaram. But the discovery of the theological notion of missio dei laid the foundations for future orientations of mission: the church is missional by nature; the integration of the church’s mission; and the end of a separation between external and internal missions. In the ecumenical movement, the concept of Europe as a mission field was taken for granted after the plenary conference of the WCC in Mexico City (1963). Mission was de-spatialized and encompasses all six continents, and, therefore, Europe as well. But the concretization of this new understanding of missionary space will have to wait: the global missionary conferences in Bangkok (1973) and Melbourne (1980) do not concern Europe. This changed at the following conference in San Antonio (1989). Mission in Europe was examined in two sections: “Witness in the Secularized World” and “Witness among adherents of other religions,” two major concerns for Western churches. The 1996 conference in Salvador proposed various models for contextualizing the Gospel. Delegations were invited to present their experiences in this domain. During the final conference to date, Athens 2005, vital questions concerning health and sickness were examined. This conference highlighted the bodily impact of the evangelical message, which can serve as a springboard toward spiritual and therapeutic human needs. In his analysis of the presentations, missiologist Wolfgang Günther demonstrated that mission in Europe only was only addressed in a very limited manner. Various challenges such as secularization, quasi-religious ideologies, and religious indifference incite European churches to reflection on their context. They suddenly become churches in a “mission field.” The fusion of mission with the church on the institutional level14 had nourished hopes for greater awareness of mission in Europe. This hope only partially materialized during the last three conferences. Global missionary conferences were unable to focus on Europe for historical and institutional reasons.15 (3) For the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, a structure of evangelical Protestantism aimed at global missionary efforts, Europe was only a secondary concern among other missionary challenges, as evidenced at

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 257

25-09-2021 09:27:21

258

Chapter 5

their first constitutive assembly in 1974. Theological consultations following the first congress did not change this approach, with the exception of the 1980 Consultation for global evangelization in Pattaya (which examined important themes such as secularism, nominalism, and new religiosity). The evangelization of Europe appeared as a priority on the Lausanne agenda thanks to its new regional restructuring. Its European branch, founded in 1985, adapted the papal expression of the “re-” and “new evangelization” for its own purposes. Of course, its own emphases defined the content: evangelization is thus tied to the concept of contextualization; re-evangelization primarily concerns Christianized countries; new evangelization concerns persons lacking a Christian background. Regional efforts of the European committee culminated in the organization of two conferences for church leaders in 1988 and 1992. The first conference in Stuttgart primarily focused on the importance of a new critical contextualization of the Gospel based on justification by faith, the central message of the Reformation. Between the first and second regional conference, the second global congress (Lausanne II) took place in Manila in 1989. This international conference could not have focused solely on Europe, but the intervention of missiologist Os Guiness (“Missions before the Modern World”) certainly addressed a major challenge for European churches. He presented an analysis of the culture of modernity and a search for new possibilities for proclaiming the Gospel in the very heart of modernity. The second regional conference at Bad Boll (1992) was organized as a consultation. Various representatives were aware of the profile of a new Europe after the fall of communism and wanted to seize new opportunities. The consultation brought six aspects together: sociopolitical and religious contexts; the churches’ relation to interdenominational works; the importance of the local church; the world of media; and the role of the Bible in society. The two regional conferences culminated with a “call” (the former) and in a “commitment” (the latter). The first missive primarily explored the fundamental questions of evangelization and its content confronted with the challenges of mission in Europe. The second focused more on the realization of a new evangelization in Europe; historical changes invited the church to new start with God; the most effective place for announcing the Gospel is found in connection with neighbors and the witness of local communities; isolated groups and those “far” from the Gospel must be found within society; collaboration between various partners in mission should be reinforced; biblical thought and ethics should be communicated to the world by all means; and finally, the Gospel invites us to realism and not to euphoria.16 Like the Lausanne movement had done since its origin, evangelical churches emphasized the importance of mission and evangelization. This primarily translated into practices of evangelization. But what is new since the emergence of the European committee in the 1980s is the search for adapted contextual models.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 258

25-09-2021 09:27:21

A Contextual Theology for Europe

259

(4) The discovery of Europe as a new space of missions in the official documents of the Roman Catholic church and the ecumenical movement, and of evangelization as critical contextualization in evangelical milieux, occur in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Of course, these developments were preceded by movements and individuals, as we demonstrate with the appearance of the expression “mission country” [Fr. pays de mission]—a semantically loaded term with a missionary significance. The expression “La France, pays de mission” was employed for the first time in 1893 by the priest Naudet, fifty years before the appearance of the book-event of Godin and Daniel.17 In a 1916 practical theology study, theologian Gerhard Hilbert (1868–1936) came to the conclusion that Germany was a “mission country.”18 Shenk evoked the English savant Walter Hobhouse, who analyzed the history of Christian throughout his 1909 Bampton Lectures. Hobhouse recalled the apostolic character of the church, and not only within the context of “pagan” peoples, but for all nations.19 Naudet for France, Hilbert for Germany, and Hobhouse for the United Kingdom are examples of a new awareness concerning Europe as a missionary locale. OUR PROPOSAL We now come to the heart of this work: our proposal for the construction of a missiology for the European context. We briefly describe the essential qualities of our model in this chapter before detailing them in corresponding sections. The correlation of contextual criteria (chapters 2 and 3) with theological criteria (chapter 4) will take place in this fifth chapter. The product of this interaction is laid out in the four following sections. The section titled “An Empirical and Hermeneutic Missiology” is the foundation upon which this process is built. The two principal elements of our contextualization model are presented in the sections “A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis” and “A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God.” The pneumatological contribution described in the content of the section “A Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology” allows these two major missiological axes of our proposition to encounter one another. This correlation is catalyzed by a biblical matrix in each subsection. The choice of these models follows a logic of correspondence: which historical biblical context best corresponds to the contemporary characteristics of the current mission “field” in Europe and the West? This correspondence is only partial. It should be submitted to a rigorous textual hermeneutic. This work should distinguish, first, between historical and contemporary context, and second, between theological affirmations linked to the times and permanent, fundamental principles. Seemingly non-historical rapprochements will thus

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 259

25-09-2021 09:27:21

260

Chapter 5

be reworked theologically from the perspective of a legitimate prophetic and hermeneutical interpellation moving toward a word of God for our time. Correspondences are situated on a cultural and historical contextual level, but also within the context of the missionary challenge, or again, in the domain of the theology of mission which proposes its critical or continuous pertinence for the European/Western context. Our project of missiology is constructed, first, on empirical and hermeneutic ground—that is, the visible and perceptible reality of the various contextual characteristics and criteria (“An Empirical and Hermeneutic Missiology”). Two principal broad lines will then be sketched. (1) The first line (“A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis”; see figure 5.1) will begin with the domination of aesthetics in our culture, one of the principle criteria of the current context. This first link (the aesthetic) will be bound to a chain of two other elements which form this first line: ethics and the church. Why choose this order of succession? We base this order on the internal dynamic sparked by contemporary anthropological deficits of the isolated domains of our society when seen in comparison with biblical anthropology. The modern human has aesthetic experiences. The ambiguity of these latter causes her to move into the ethical domain. Her intuitive and autonomous morality leaves her disappointed in its turn, unable to realize her ideal. She will then be driven toward a community of people who God A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis

al gic iolo ogy s e l l ecc sio ” An mis “true

l ca thi logy e ” An issioood m “g c eti sth logy l” e a io fu Anmiss auti e “b

Context

Transcendance

A)

e

tiv

ec

p ers

P

B) Dynamics: - anthropological - rational C) Characteristics: - aesthetic (provisory) - eschatological (crisis)

Immanence

Figure 5.1  A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 260

25-09-2021 09:27:21

A Contextual Theology for Europe

261

live with the same deficits as her, but which bears another message uniting the different ambivalent aesthetic, ethical, and collective experiences, both positive and negative. She can radically recognize, reconstruct, and reorient herself by following the resurrected Christ through the evangelical discourse of this community. In other words, the types of deprivation generated by different life experiences call for experiences of another order which are as close as possible to the origin of her dissatisfaction. This explains the precise order of the progression (aesthetic—ethical—group). Disappointing experiences of the “beautiful” seeks for satisfaction in action, since it is immediately available to aesthetics due to the physical structure of the human. Sooner or later, the experience of the “good” seeks the legitimation in the “true” which is available in the life of a group of persons. Western man today is primarily attracted by the image. It is the most obvious perception among the other senses, as well as the most imposing in our (aesthetic) society. The human is then delivered over to her possibilities of (ethical) actions under the sign of pragmatism or idealism. Finally, she seeks a collective legitimacy for the individual construction of her identity because she does not manage to complete her autonomy, and her sometimes declared narcissism. The dynamic of the passage from one domain to the other is not only given by a negative anthropology. It also corresponds to a positive anthropological perspective on human needs: her need to appear or to exist, which she finds in aesthetics; her need to be active and to be autonomous as a moral being; and her need for identity and love which she finds in the face-to-face relations of the group according to its social structure. We can juxtapose the internal movement of this anthropological progression to the similar philosophical conception of Søren Kierkegaard.20 This first principal line of our missiology is structured by three elements: (a) Its perspective finds its origin in the cultural context (immanence), moving toward God (transcendence). In this model, experience with God will be connected to the third link, in the church, the bearer of the evangelical message. (b) The first line of our missiology follows an anthropological-rational dynamic since man listens to his needs and experiences. He analyzes them, bringing the product of his reflections to bear in other domains. We are aware that this logic is an ideal-typical construction influenced by other factors. (c) The first principal line is characterized by the aesthetic-eschatological aspect. The beautiful is not restricted to the first domain; it also informs the ethical and ecclesiological domains. Christian ethics and ecclesiology must have an aesthetic aspect in order to be perceived by Western society. The aesthetic characteristic of our time resembles a particular era situated in scripture, the “last times.”21 This time is bookended in the past by the by ascension of the resurrected one, and in the future by his Parousia.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 261

25-09-2021 09:27:21

262

Chapter 5

This period is treated in Christian doctrine under eschatology, whence the “eschatological” designation of a second characteristic of this first missiological line. Revelation, the eschatological biblical book par excellence, is packed with ambiguous images which demonstrate an excessive aesthetic. The doubly aesthetic-eschatological characteristic remains ephemeral and critical because the world is heading toward its final “crisis,” the judgment of God. This first principal line ultimately proves fragile; it is a provisory missiology of crisis, according to its perspective (from context toward the word of God—that is, a depreciation of the divine perspective), its dynamic (a negative and positive anthropology coupled with rational faculties), and its characteristics (ephemeral aesthetics and the “last times” which situate us in our time).  Each circle on the “context” pole (our first missiological line) will be connected with the theological pole (see figure 5.2) as follows: the first, “aesthetic link” (“An aesthetic missiology”) connects with the ambiguous image in Revelation. For the “ethical link” (“An Ethical Missiology”), we compare the situation of “strangers” (1 Pet. 1:1) and the missiology presented in 1 Peter (“good and beautiful works,” 1 Pet. 2:11–12).22 We assign the “church” A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis

l

ica log o i gy les cc siolo ” e s An mi “true

t” igh d l -16 n a 3 alt :1 “s ew 5 g in tth Be Ma

l ica eth logy n A sio ” s d mi goo “

c eti sth ogy e a l ” An issio tiful m eau “b

d an rks od l wo 12 o G ifu 11: t au r 2 be Pete 1

s ou igu b m ge e a ima ypse Th al oc Ap

Figure 5.2  Biblical Models Corresponding to the First Missiological Line.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 262

25-09-2021 09:27:22

A Contextual Theology for Europe

263

circle (“An Ecclesiological Missiology”) to a pre-paschal missiology of works from Matthew (5:13–16). We are looking for biblical matrices whose contexts and theologies of mission might correspond to the various contextual criteria within the three domains (aesthetic: Revelation; ethical: 1 Peter 2; church: Matthew 5). Through these connections, the order of these biblical books is chronologically inverted in relation to their initial place in the New Testament. Revelation suddenly finds itself in first place, while the addressees of Peter’s epistle must be content with second, and the Gospel of Matthew with last place. What explains this reversal? The specific contents of these books makes them comparable to a situation in our European context. Our contextual concerns place them in this arrangement. Is this an anachronism? Certainly, from a historical point of view, but not theologically. In any case, the result is surprising. Should we not inject a stronger eschatological accent into a Western missiology (as we have seen in the section “Discovery of Eschatology” in chapter 4)? Lesslie Newbigin puts this criterion in first place. The risk of rapprochement between the aesthetic criterion of the context and the theological eschatological aspect allows us to highlight the urgency of an eschatological Western missiology in the very structure of our model. But this first line falls under the sign of crisis, lending our proposal a provisory qualification. “Crisis,” because this line is overdetermined by anthropological requirements. It starts with human concerns and the European cultural context—which is good logic for a model of contextualization. But could a theological model dominated by human concerns subsist in the long run? No, since such a model presents the human from an ideal viewpoint. Man lives far from God; he is not naturally open to God’s word. Man is thus headed for a crisis. In biblical terms, this is “judgment.” It is the imposition of the ultimate justice of God. This line is overburdened with anthropological weight. It lacks sufficient theological grounding to function as the proposed contextual model on its own. This line corresponds to a possible missiological approach. But this approach falls under the sign of crisis because we are living in the “last times” and because its intentional anthropological accent cannot guarantee its own long-term duration.  The selected biblical texts bring us closer to a legitimate and valid centripetal biblical missiology: man is attracted by the aesthetics and ethics of the church (Matt. 5:13–16: “An Ecclesiological Missiology”; see figure 5.3). This missiology model responds to the anthropological dynamic which is strengthened by centripetal dynamic momentum. The church “shines.” These “rays” can be seen and perceived by men. They attract men to God. The stage is set for an encounter between human aspirations and the missionary message, between the needs of man and the word of God—in short, between the human and God. The missionary encounter is born. 

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 263

25-09-2021 09:27:22

264

Chapter 5

A centripetal missiology “attraction”

A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis l Anlogica y o g i les iolo ecc miss true” “ l ica eth logy n A ssio d” mi “goo ic het est logy ” a An issio tiful m eau “b

Figure 5.3  Centripetal Missiological Model Corresponding to the First Missiological Line.

(2) The second principal line of our missiological model (“A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God”; see figure 5.4) begins from the opposite perspective: from God toward context, from the transcendent Christ toward immanence. Its source is found in the missio Dei of the trinitarian God which pours forth toward men with its salutary blessings. Jesus, the Christ, accomplished salvation and its realization in time in his person. Because of this he is the content of the missionary message. The word of God is an actualization of this message historically constituted in the past. The Holy Spirit allows for the revitalization of this historical message in a present experience. The first line of our missiological model responds to human aspirations; it is by and large a non-critical missiology. This is not the case for the second line of our model: here, God is the origin of an initiative which moves toward an encounter with humans. This is a profoundly theological dynamic. The characteristics of the second line are called “critical” and “permanent.” The word of God is generally opposed to the excessive aesthetics of our time, unveiling new and old idols and delivering “autonomous” ethics from its isolation. The word of God deliberately seeks conflict here. It is the encounter between the holy God and self-deifying Western man. It strips bare the pretenses of a culture which is both highly developed from a human viewpoint and extremely far from God from a theological perspective. The truth of God draws the line between the provisory and the permanent, between fragile and solid theological compositions. This second principal line is fundamentally critical because God does not simply figure as one idol among others, responding to

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 264

25-09-2021 09:27:23

265

A Contextual Theology for Europe

God

Transcendance

A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God

A so mi terio ssi log olo ica gy l A)

Pe

rsp

ect

B) Dynamic: - theological C) Characteristics: - critical - permanent

ive

A m soc issio ial log eth y o ics f

A

mi of ssiol ho og pe y

Context

Immanence

Figure 5.4  A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God.

the aspirations of Europeans. Its critique (motivated by its primary property, “truth”) and its supremacy over humans allows us to attribute the qualifier “permanent” to this second line. The word of God thus maintains its liberating and transformative force. It is permanent. The structure of the first missiological line proves to be provisory as long as the word of God does not intervene in all its plenitude, and consequently, in all its authority. But this line is effaced at the apparition of such a word coming from the true God.  The second missiological line for Europe is constituted by three circles. The first forms “a soteriological missiology” which includes Christology (as soteriology’s foundation) and the proclamation of both doctrines through the word of God. The second circle treats “a missiology of social ethics,” and the third, “a missiology of hope.” The first ring constitutes the heaviest theological pole of the three. It is determinative because Christ and his work are the foundation of the Gospel, of theology, and of missiology, irrespective of all context and time. Through the action of the word of God, salvation in Jesus Christ creates two movements. (a) The first dynamic concerns the first principal line of our missiology. It produces a reworking of the three links of this first line, which were formerly submitted to a purely anthropological dynamic: the church is unified by the word of God and not the aesthetic choices of individuals; ethics receives its solid evangelical foundation through justification by grace by means of faith,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 265

25-09-2021 09:27:24

266

Chapter 5

instead of orienting itself only toward human perspectives; aesthetics finds its value and its place in an overarching theological perspective. It inverts the direction of the anthropological-rational dynamic of the first principal line (moving from immanent context to transcendent God) in favor of the theological conformity of the second line and its perspective (from the transcendent God to the immanent context). We thus turn from the aesthetic/ethical/church movement to the soter​iolog​ical/​eccle​siolo​gical​/ethi​cal/a​esthe​tic movement. This reworking liberates the three links from their destructive isolation, binding them together in an evangelical way. Theologically speaking, ethics and aesthetics depend primarily on soteriology. (b) The second dynamic organizes things in proper theological order according to the movement of the second principal line (see figure 5.5).23 Ethics moves from preceding soteriology to following it. Under the impetus of the Holy Spirit, the word of God and the motivation of God’s grace invoke new behavior from the individual (individual ethics), in the church, and in society (social ethics). Lived out, the Gospel can have a collective impact to the point of changing the ideological horizon of a culture, moving in the direction of increasing hope. This latter theme borrows from the eschatological characteristic of the first principal line of our missiology—no longer as a declaration of the historical place in which we are situated (i.e., the “last times” as

“T

A so mi teri ssi olo olo gi gy cal

he

fo rg s iv sp ins ene el ” ss o

A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God

Go

fL

uk

e

A m so iss cia iol l e og thi y o cs f

of Th

ep

re

se

nt

a

n e r asp d i eig ec m m no t an fG en od t

Th

A m of issio ho lo pe gy tra Th ns e f c Th en utu e r da re eig nt a n o as nd f G pe od ct

Figure 5.5  Biblical Model Corresponding to the Second Missiological Line.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 266

25-09-2021 09:27:24

267

A Contextual Theology for Europe

an historical indication of an era), but rather as a change of perspective generated by salvation from Jesus (i.e., the effects of salvation as Christian hope). What biblical missiological models can we offer as theological resources for the three circles in the second principle line of our model? Luke’s theology of mission (i.e., mission as the proclamation of the forgiveness of sins— cf. Luke 24:47) fits most closely with the first, fundamental soteriological circle. Next, a theology of the reign of God nourishes the second circle (i.e., the immanent and present aspect of God’s reign) as well as the third circle (its transcendent and future aspect).  The dynamic of this second principal line begins from Christ, its center, and moves outward toward the context. It corresponds to a centrifugal missiological model (see figure 5.6). Christ left missionary witness as a command to his disciples, who carry the evangelical message to the ends of the earth. In this second principal line, missionary attraction in the centripetal model of the first line is exchanged for a model of sending: the church is sent into the world. The disciples of Jesus communicate the message of Jesus, surmounting all obstacles to draw near to people.  The two principal lines of a missiology for the European context must intersect in order for a missionary encounter to really happen: the human perceives God; her aspirations intersect with the design of God’s love; the word of God seeks the human “heart.” The intersection of these two lines A centrifugal missiology “sending” A

so mi terio ssi lo olo gic gy al

A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God

A m so issi cia ol l e ogy thi o cs f

A

mi of ssio ho log pe y

Figure 5.6  Centrifugal Missiological Model Corresponding to the Second Missiological Line.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 267

25-09-2021 09:27:25

268

Chapter 5

denotes the missionary encounter which translates by the human’s illumination as a condition of conversion to or aversion from God (see figure 5.7). The possibility of an encounter and its exact place are the responsibility of the Holy Spirit. The occasion is given by God himself and by his sending his Holy Spirit to the earth. The exact place depends on his will and sovereignty. The word of God in the power of the Holy Spirit can attain man at all points and in all aspects of his life. As against the two rigid lines (“A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis” and “A missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God”), the section “A flexible and dynamic pneumatological missiology” contributes the flexible and indispensable element to the model. The intersection of the two lines of our model falls under the Holy Spirit’s jurisdiction.  AN EMPIRICAL AND HERMENEUTIC MISSIOLOGY A contextual theology clearly starts with the context under study. This explains the winding path of chapters 2 and 3 which allowed us to understand the cultural context of Europe. A European empirical missiology is based on this historical and cultural reality, defining various immanent and transcendent realities and specifying that the immanent reality actually exists and is no illusion. The existence of the immanent reality still says nothing of the possibility of its perception. By way of his body and spirit, man is equipped Action of the Holy Spirit

gi

lo

rio

te

so .

lm ca

l

sio

cle

ec

.

lm

ca

i og

so

ci m. al of et hi cs

.

lm

ca

i eth

A flexible and dynamic

m

.o

fh

op

e

cm

eti

th

s ae

.

pneumatological missiology

Figure 5.7  A Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 268

25-09-2021 09:27:26

A Contextual Theology for Europe

269

with senses, reason, and a conscience. He can perceive reality. The call of his conscience, the observation of creation and history allow him to see the reality present before him. Observation leads man to organize and structure raw information into a meaningful system. Thanks to this system established before or after observation, he can understand or interpret reality. He can access a partial general revelation of the world and of God. Thus our model is not only based on existing and perceptible realities (i.e., empirical missiology), but also on the necessity of reading and interpreting them—that is, an hermeneutical missiology. An empirical and hermeneutical missiology constitutes the foundation of our model. An Empirical Missiology This foundation is formed by the various elements described in the five contextual criteria in chapter 3. These are: the geographic and demographic criterion, the preconditions, the empirical criterion, the historical criterion, and the philosophical criterion. They are filled out by several theological criteria from chapter 4: the section “Immanent and Transcendent ‘Realities’” from the preconditions; the anthropological criteria partially examined in the sections “Discovery of Eschatology,” “A Postmodern Soteriology,” and “Human Unity and the Overarching Goal of Salvation”; and finally, the criterion of a theology of religion (“‘Religion’ and ‘Faith’,” and partially “An Exclusive Message in a Pluralistic World”). These three theological criteria (empirical, anthropological, and theology of religion) figure on the side of the empirical criterion of the context. We have already touched upon several challenges for each criterion in their respective sections and at the end of chapters 3 and 4. We will not repeat ourselves or continue this here, though several points warrant further attention. The Criterion of Preconditions The challenge of the criterion of preconditions consists in reframing an anti“mission” sentiment which is historically explicable via the partially negative legacy of Christianity in Europe, the representation of its connection with colonization, and the anguish before the totalitarian ideology associated with the idea of mission. This (partially justified) feeling has kept missiology in European universities from getting back on its feet since the 1960s. For theology to maintain a measure of disciplinary legitimacy in modern society, missiology had to be set aside and treated as taboo within theology itself. Ultimately, mission touches on the question of salvation communicated to unbelieving persons. As Christians, can we be sure that we have the legitimacy necessary for proclaiming this message? Should not this “ambition” be abandoned before hostile public opinion which interprets this message as a

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 269

25-09-2021 09:27:26

270

Chapter 5

dangerous and globalizing ideology? From an historical viewpoint, very few Christians and theologians have taken this first path. After the dissolution of the taboo of mission, the mystery of “religion” should be targeted. This concept born in the West stipulates an ultimate and ideal form and content for religion into which all the historical religious “rivers” run. Missiologist Teuffel has demonstrated that such a theoretical construction does not hold up to non-Western perceptions of the “religious.” In such contexts, religion cannot be isolated as an object. It is intrinsically linked to the culture of a particular population.24 A missionary will is a necessary precondition for contextualizing the evangelical message. This will can only spring from a solid theology of mission which will cause a missionary movement to emerge out of Christianity itself. From an historical viewpoint and in the history of Protestant missions, these movements have existed only at the extremities of institutional Protestantism in Europe. Furthermore, a boost in theological formation is necessary to increase the missiological competence of theologians themselves and to make a considerable effort in missiological research. A taboo and a mystery cannot be pierced without adequate linguistic tools.25 This new language to be created is the first task of the new contextualization of the Gospel in Europe. At this point, the historical criterion comes into play in the service of contextualization; The analysis of Christianization, its positive or critical interpretation, cannot be separated from this work since the Gospel is not arriving on European soil for the first time. It has been informally contextualized in the history of each European country. This is the particular challenge of contextualization in Europe: we are not in “uncharted” territory. The terrain itself is partly “Christian.” In the best cases this is an advantage, but the inconvenience of this ambiguous heritage is dominant. After 2,000 years of the history of Christianity in Europe, many European countries are witnessing a break with this tradition (Traditionsabbruch). A new contextualization on this traditional foundation is no longer possible, even if we were to rely on successful examples of informal contextualization, or positive Christian values which forged our society in the past. This “Christian tradition” has been exhausted. Contextualization requires a new language, the construction of “laboratories” of religious languages and unheard-of theological directions, building anthropological bridges between the resurrected Christ’s work of salvation and secularized Western man. The Geographic and Demographic Criterion As raw data concerning state of things in Europe, the geographic and demographic criterion will have a determining influence in the construction of

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 270

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

271

a missiology for Europe, even before any theological considerations. Such theological considerations can quickly lose their pertinence if they do not account for impending and important changes for the “old continent.” A drop in birth rates, the aging population, the increase in migratory flux from developing to rich (and consequently European) countries—all these factors will play a foundational role in the future face of the “religious” in Europe. An aging “Christian” population finds itself faced with young immigrants who are generally more “religious” than persons in their host culture. The economic factor and the standard of living in Europe will also play an important role in the opening or closing of Europeans to “religious” questions. In any case, the global financial crisis in 2008 sounded the death knell of one of the last Western beliefs: liberal “faith” in materialism and capitalism.26 Can we maintain our standard of living, or should we learn to live with less? Can a Western society brought up on materialism still create other immaterial values after the death of all metanarratives? The process of secularization is also a consequence of the materialism which has durably affected European churches. It has now likewise reached more Catholic countries, after having affected dominantly Protestant countries. Orthodox cultures are the next to be subjected to this process. A similar evolution is on the horizon for Muslim populations, even if they have a stronger nation-religion bond in comparison with Christian populations. This bond signifies that a possible abandon of the Islamic faith is often interpreted by those involved as renouncing their ethnic identity. At present, this remains a high price to pay, one which will be lowered only among future generations. The question of the development of Islam remains open, since it has also demonstrated its capacities for resistance or resurgence in societies transitioning to modernity. Christianity currently remains the religion of the majority of Europeans, even though its erosion continues with a drop in practitioners and it must increasingly seek its place as a minority in some countries. Christianity will retain some pertinence as a “vicarious” religion, “delegated” a certain religious role by the majority (primarily in the social and humanitarian domains) or as a link to past memories.27 Nevertheless, this erosion should not hide the vitality of the two twins of Christianity which are experiencing numeric growth. The trans-denominational charismatic movement and denominational pentecostalisms form a group of their own alongside classic evangelicalism. This vitality ought not be neglected, as many observers have done. Historian Jenkins has drawn our attention to the fact that these three fringe movements—which, counted individually, are only fringe movements—when combined, number more persons than Muslims living in Europe.28 Religious expressions of these groups and movements (which, structurally speaking, are extremely flexible) currently align with the postmodern ambience. Everything will depend on

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 271

25-09-2021 09:27:27

272

Chapter 5

their capacity to maintain their pertinence amidst emotional one-upmanship which could lead, first, to the evaporation of the content of the Christian message itself, and second, to the loss of their reason for being. The place of the “religious” in Europe amidst the dynamic of globalization is a primordial question. Will Europe maintain its position as a model for other continents in matters of secularization, or will it be an exception? Current indications might lead us to think that Europe is not maintaining this role, and this not for ideological or political reasons, but perhaps simply due to its demographic evolution.29 The changing configuration of the religious landscape toward greater “religious” plurality will weigh heavily on secular political models. States modeled on secularism or laicity will have to adapt to a new reality, if only for reasons of democratic representation, which cannot exclude an important part of the population from its democratic system.30 The European missiologist cannot overestimate the role this criterion will play in the coming decades. Decreasing natality, the aging of the population, and financial precarity call upon all theological forces to construct a missiology of hope. The Empirical Criterion A missiology for the European context will necessarily concern itself with the empirical criterion analyzing the addressees of the Gospel. We discern four principal groups in Europe beyond cultural and national differences: adherents to religions other than Christianity, “cultural” Christians, adherents to “beliefs,” and those “without” religions. (a) Adherents to other religions serve as an interrogation for Christians in Europe. How do they perceive Christianity, the churches, and Christians, with their message and lifestyle? The presence of these persons questions the ethics of Christians and the moral state of the church. In some cases, this questioning can transform into a prophetic message, a call to repentance. For example, for the Reformers, Islam corresponded not only to the threat of the “antichrist,” but also to a call to return to the evangelical message.31 Other religions do not endanger Christianity if Christian know who they are, and better, what they believe. In such a case, the missiological model would be inverted into a prophetic missiology which interrogates the churches and questions their pertinence, their depth, and their fidelity to the message of Christ. The option of interreligious dialogue seems to offer limited application for fundamental and practical reasons evoked earlier. One cannot “discuss and find an agreement” between basketball and football, according to Teuffel’s metaphor.32 But possibilities remain for intercultural dialogue with its positive and pacifying effect, for the daily evangelical witness of a Christian community or home, in which the warmth of hospitality can be experienced. Adherents to other religions can open themselves to the Gospel insofar

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 272

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

273

as it offers to uphold their cultural (and, at least partially, their religious) identity instead of radically abandoning it; a liberation from fears and distresses before their gods and known spirits; a “better justice” before the pressure of traditions; and finally, an ethical surplus in relation to their religion of origin. (b) “Cultural” Christians are those who claim a certain Christian heritage, whether consciously or not, but who do not practice their faith. Other similar expressions or phenomena exist: non-practicing Christians, nominal Christians (or “non-practicing believers”); the anglophone phrases “unchurched people” (“believing without belonging,” “vicarious religion”); in German, Namenschristentum, Kirchenfremde, Kierchendistanzierte.33 These persons often combine residual elements of the Christian faith with various diffuse beliefs. These definitions are helpful for sociological surveys or to describe historical facts. They direct the theologian to the question of the definition of the Christian, the limits of the Christian faith, and particularly to the question of the beginning of the Christian life. They evoke the immense challenge of a missiology for those who still consider themselves “still something like Christians,” but who no longer practice their faith. This category of persons is large in Europe since it is situated between practitioners and unbelievers, marking an almost obligatory passage in the secularization process of formerly Christianized societies. Despite the fact that they number even more than practicing Christians, few theologians are interested in these persons. The ambiguous identity maintained by cultural Christians certainly does nothing to help the testimony of churches, who propose an equally ambiguous image (at least in the eyes of observers, if not necessarily in the churches’ own eyes). Doctrinal and ecclesiological pluralism (primarily on the Protestant side) create further confusion, and the religious “product” of these churches remains invisible, inaudible, or incomprehensible. Theology in Europe must return to the basics, to explain what a Christian is and what are the requirements for becoming a “disciple” of Jesus Christ. Alongside the unconditional welcome of all persons in the churches (in the sense of a theology of the reign of God), we must not forget the price to be paid for following Jesus (Luke 9:57–62). Obviously, European churches which are more theologically liberal are currently submitted to the pressure of losing their practitioners and are necessarily “only welcoming.” But such an “open” attitude apparently without accompanying demands dissimulates the limits of the church and the content of its identity.34 The welcome is thus transformed into a hostile experience because the community it concerns does not allow itself to be known. It refuses to define its limits. But we cannot enter into relation with another who does not give their identity. It is difficult for a “missionary” church to imitate Jesus when it has opened all the “doors” for its adherents to leave (John 6:66–67). In a minority position, it is risky to grant such freedom to the addressees of the Gospel. But fear in the face

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 273

25-09-2021 09:27:27

274

Chapter 5

of total secularization of society should not lead the church to lowering its requirements. The radicality of the Gospel gives the church its missionary profile, since it is this which distinguishes the church from its surroundings. Instead, Western disinterest in a theology of conversion suggests the upholding of a culture of the myth of a still-Christianized Europe, reinforcing ideas of apparent continuity between the surrounding culture and the evangelical message. Why do churches need to entertain such a myth, given the reality of our de facto secularized societies? Essential explications are needed to counter the lack of biblical knowledge and define various elements of conversion: the universal salvific work of Jesus Christ, the role of faith, the intervention of the Holy Spirit, repentance, confession of sin and the creeds which initiate into the Christian faith. This theological clarification should clear the fog and pose a distinction between before and after conversion, between someone who does not know Christ and a disciple who has traversed the “new birth.”35 European churches would gain increased readability if they could decide upon an elementary confession of faith in several phrases. (Of course, longer catechisms already exist.) A missiology adequate for this category of persons has seen various models throughout history. On the side of Protestantism, we might note Pietism as a program for reforming the church, “internal mission,” and the awakening movements. The goal of these movements was reform rather than rupture, aiming to revive evangelical zeal and practice in a population which was still “Christian.” This kind of effort is still current among Christians themselves. But the message of rupture (conversion) should probably occupy a more important place today to help numerous “cultural” Christians situate themselves within or outside of following Jesus, and to render the churches’ witness more coherent. (c) Adherents of diffuse “beliefs” are not nourished by the biblical message, but rather from the “mystical-esoteric nebula” (Françoise Champion) and in alternative beliefs. In a way more pronounced than modernity, postmodernity offers these persons an ideal terrain for the practice of these profuse beliefs. Accepting the irrational alongside the rational is legitimate for the people of this time. First, this evolution should be welcomed as the exhaustion of modernity and the excessive accent placed on the rational human element. The myth of the end of religion (and of the irrational) in certain secularization theories did not plan on an anthropological return of the body, emotions, and the senses, which try to fill the void left by “pure” reason. Next, these religious expressions should be validated as a search for responses to questions posed by the individual’s biography and the new possibilities of modernity itself, a quest for extra-empirical and transcendent knowledge, and an exploration of an overarching hermeneutic of life (a metanarrative). Postmoderns

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 274

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

275

thus relativize the unchecked “reign” of reason in modernity, bringing other, similarly important elements of human life into the foreground. But how can we connect these irrational experiences to a Christian discourse? Practitioners of these beliefs certainly do not consider their convictions to be religious in nature. A response might take the form of an extensive definition of “religion,” for example, as the “ultimate concern” of humans.36 The convictions of adherents to diffuse “beliefs” would thus find their place on the side of “religion.” But “religion” is not yet a synonym with “faith in God.” A theological response is situated in rupture rather than in continuity of a belief in religion. A biblical approach critical of beliefs would allow them to be unveiled as idolatry in opposition to the first commandment of the decalogue. The extensive definition mentioned above could be transformed by affirming that religion refers to everything that concerns God in an absolute way. These beliefs ultimately do not respect God because they exclude or banalize him. The practice of beliefs which resist modernity will not surprise the theologian. Used to biblical narratives, she knows that beliefs can persist for centuries. A simultaneously constructive and critical Christian reading of beliefs will propose, first, a reinjection of the rational contribution into these ideological systems. Next, it will extend its holistic approach to salvation in Jesus Christ, a project which encompasses the totality and all the elements of the human. Finally, it will offer a relational certitude through the person of the resurrected one which will carry man through existential uncertainty. The rational contribution will combat all naiveté and charlatanism. The inclusive approach will assuage holistic needs. And certainty will nourish human hope. Those who hold alternative beliefs form a large part of the population of secularized countries in Europe. If only by way of numbers, they constitute a missiological priority. (d) Another missiological priority concerns persons “without” religion, whose designation alone raises questions similar to those raised by “cultural” Christians (point b). How should we define the first group in relation to a religion and the second group in relation to Christianity, despite their distances and disjunctions? If the former are called “non-,” “a-,” and “without” religion, the latter are often described by way of their distance from the church and from Christianity. The ambiguity of labels translates the particular historical evolution of our continent on the one hand, and the difficulty of delimiting a domain of language or ideology which does not exist in the world of those concerned on the other. Incidentally, we must note that atheist discourse is much less virulent than during the last century, and that declared atheists or agnostics are proportionally fewer in number. Various sociological surveys have also drawn attention to the permeability of categorical limits. Today, the lines between atheists, agnostics, those “without” religion, “cultural”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 275

25-09-2021 09:27:27

276

Chapter 5

Christians, and practicing Christians are blurred: some practitioners do noy adhere exclusively to biblical beliefs, some atheists and of those “without” religion nevertheless ultimately recognize other beliefs. This nebulosity only bothers those who wish to understand the phenomena, but not those who it describes. We have here an assumed characteristic of postmodernity, in which a rational system and an irrational ideology mix with a variety of postulated truths. We can legitimately and radically pose the question: is the affirmation of non-religiosity and of the rejection of Christianity in Europe pertinent from an historical and philosophical perspective? In this sense, Novalis had rightly emphasized that in Europe we cannot not be a Christian. Gianni Vattimo takes up these thoughts, saying that Europe is a secularized Christianity and that the Christian tradition essentially constitutes its unity. For Vattimo, “the West or Christianity” does not represent an exclusive either/or, but a synonymous relation, an equivalence.37 We can refuse or ignore this legacy, even if it exists. We might be simply unable to access this “faith” due to a lack of culture or religious socialization, since the process of secularization has been active in Europe for several centuries. To want to impose a Christian explanation of the world or a “religious” framework of research is thus inappropriate for those “without religion.” This framework does not exist for them; it signifies nothing. Another expression must be found to define these persons, an expression without recourse to a religious language, and which permits those it describes the right to their own self-definition. The religious indifference observed in sociological studies through the words and acts of a growing number of Europeans poses problems to sociologists and theologians despite the persistence of the phenomenon. First, we observe that those indifferent in religious matters often cultivate a “garden” of beliefs without realizing it. This observation pleads, secondly, in favor of homo naturaliter religiosus. The forces of secularization will thus never bring about the end of “religion” according to this postulate. The sociological model of Thomas Luckmann is an example of this opinion.38 His idea of “invisible religion” includes the human capacity to transcend her biological nature. Consequently, each process of socialization bears the mark of religiosity. The system which serves integration into the social order is called religion. This latter becomes “invisible” today because of its individualization which no longer allows for the identification with a “traditional” understanding of religion. Eberhard Tiefensee, an eastern German philosopher, shows the advantages of such an anthropological a priori, but also and primarily its big disadvantage: if religiosity were an integral part of the humanity of man (e.g., like reason), his denial would necessarily correspond to the negation of the humanity of the man who declares himself to be “without” religion. Sociologists of religions

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 276

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

277

do not necessarily come to this logical consequence, but it nevertheless corresponds to some of their models which put their anthropologies in relation with philosophical and theological anthropologies. For Tiefensee, this path is impracticable from a philosophical perspective since we cannot deny the humanity of a group of people, even if they are “areligious.”39 They are simply different persons. Instead, the “theological” or “sociological” disappointment when confronted with the postulate of the homo areligiosus allows observers of the constraint of a “religious” definition of the phenomenon to adopt a more respectful and free approach. Third, this directs us toward potential theological openings for an interpretation of homo areligiosus. Biblical testimony incites us primarily to prudence regarding the notion of “religion.” It can be juxtaposed with the content of biblical “faith.” But it can also buttress an idealist construction of a “religion” common to all people. From a theological perspective, “religion” cannot be the ultimate question; only God can. This means that the two opposed postulates (humans are religious by nature, or they are not) should be analyzed from a divine viewpoint. The person who confesses a religion or who is indifferent must be situated before God. If God is the fundamental question and not “religion,” there is no need to account for anthropological considerations (e.g., is man religiously predisposed or is he “non-musical”40 as concerns the “religious”?). This changes everything for missiology. The treatment of the question of “religion” is not the priority; the relation to God is. Humans’ religious quest finds itself confronted with a God who, as creator and master of the universe, reserves all rights over man. The question of mission is no longer posed in terms of human needs, but in terms of lordship. In addition to the reign of God, we must include God’s will to love man. The missionary approach must consequentially privilege a theology of creation instead of a theology of religion as granting access to the offer of salvation. This sketch of the four groups of addressees for the Gospel in Europe has also integrated the criterion of a theology of religion. We could say the same thing for the anthropological criterion, and even to an extent the philosophical criterion, whose challenges have already been discussed in their respective areas and in the conclusions of chapters 3 and 4. A Hermeneutical Missiology The interpretation of reality falls under the jurisdiction of hermeneutical missiology. To perceive a “reality” is one thing (i.e., empirical missiology); to understand it is another (hermeneutical missiology). The theological notion of mission offers a grid of interpretation which goes beyond the simply “different” (a hermeneutic of alterity)41 or “foreign” (a xenological hermeneutic).42 It counts as a dynamic of the realization of the reign of God. To

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 277

25-09-2021 09:27:27

278

Chapter 5

understand the world, humans need a partial or all-encompassing interpretive grid. Metanarratives propose overarching interpretations of reality. The diversity of human experiences is brought together in one story in a way that makes sense. Various cultures, religions, philosophies, and political movements have functioned via metanarratives—for example, the Roman Empire, Christianity, Islam, the Enlightenment, Marxism, and more recently, the global economy. The advent of postmodernity puts these overarching narratives in question, as a critical reaction against the typically modern idea of “progress.” The representatives of postmodern philosophy highlight the danger of universalizing one’s own ideological viewpoint, which leads to abuses of power and domination. They emphasize certain terrible historical excesses which in their view justify abandoning universalist pretentions in favor of values like particularity, diversity, and relativism. The missionary enterprise of different churches can be classified as a universal pretention par excellence which ought to be treated with suspicion. This is certainly one reason explaining why “mission” and missionary practice are suspected of power-seeking. To propose a hermeneutic of mission in postmodernity thus amounts to a foolish undertaking because it was already rejected in the modern era. It is first necessary to explain the content of such a hermeneutic, then show why mission should not raise fears of an overarching aggressive narrative. Content A metanarrative tries to accommodate and unite two opposing components: the universal and the particular. The human has particular and universal experiences. She has a desire to bring together and understand these very different experiences. God is the only one who unites universality and particularity in his person. He is the God of the universe, but also the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The issue of the universal and the particular crops up in the biblical notion of Mission. “Mission takes place between the highly particular history of Jesus and the universal goal of God’s coming kingdom.”43 New Testament exegete Richard Bauckham deduces two principle “missionary” perspectives from biblical accounts. The first perspective is that of humans. God begins with a singular choice, moving toward the plural. He chooses Abraham to bring blessings to all the families of the earth. He designates Israel to belong to him and to reveal himself to the nations. He enthrones king David, a precursor of God’s reign over all creation. The three narratives create three trajectories from the particular toward the multiple.44 In the second perspective, Bauckham’s analysis focuses rather on the geographical horizon of the Bible, moving from literal observations to a “representative” interpretation. The seventy nations cited in Genesis 10 is an

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 278

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

279

example of this interpretation. Noah’s descendants correspond to the known world from Israel’s viewpoint. But this list is incomplete; there are nations which are not included. It is a particular historical perspective which nevertheless lays out all nations because this symbolically precise number indicates totality. Bauckham understands “representative geography” in this sense. A particular biblical element simultaneously represents another representative reality. This is a question of the relation between the particular and the universal in biblical geography. Bauckham also draws attention to a second geographical movement which goes from the center (Jerusalem) toward the horizon. Far-off peoples were not marginalized in comparison to Zion. On the contrary, the project of Israel was bound to that of the nations. Finally, Bauckham notes the geographical push and pull of the (primarily, though not exclusively) centripetal movements in the Old Testament and the (mostly) centrifugal movements in the New Testament. Individuals, Israel as a people, Jesus, or the church attract people by their message. Messengers of God and Jesus Christ announce the Good News. Here too, missionary geographical considerations mix the particular and the universal.45 These two principal perspectives emphasize that the theological notion of mission effectively allows for the construction of a metanarrative around a theology of the reign of God. A Peaceful Metanarrative But how can this sort of metanarrative, which will immediately fall under the critiques of postmodern philosophy, be sustained? This critique inevitably rests on the fact that different expressions of Christianity exhibit an imperialist and aggressive character. First, we observe with Bauckham that the end of metanarratives has not yet definitively arrived. It suffices to observe the global economic situation to perceive that a new domination based on an ideology of economic globalization is attempting to impose its values.46 A new promise of progress, of improvement for all through this ideology, is already showing its limits and its perversion. At least one metanarrative, therefore, still exists in the Western world. The future will show if Westerners can truly get rid of all these narratives; for the moment, this is not the case. History teaches, rather, that different political and economic models have always required an ideological legitimation to justify a certain domination. Second, Christianity in the West simply no longer has enough strength to appear as an oppressive majority imposing its message on a minority; these times have passed. The evangelical message’s claim to absolute truth should not be a pretext for refusing dialogue or advocating coercion. Faith imposed by force would annihilate faith. Christian witness is non-coercive. As a minority, Western Christianity can once again play a critical role precisely in

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 279

25-09-2021 09:27:27

280

Chapter 5

face of the dominant metanarrative because it sides with the weak and abandoned. We observe that an hermeneutical missiology can contribute to an understanding and cohesion of the world because it proposes a metanarrative founded on the reign of God which can unite the particular and the universal through the missionary dynamic. In the person of God, the two elements of the world unite. A PROVISORY AESTHETIC-ESCHATOLOGICAL MISSIOLOGY OF CRISIS An Aesthetic Missiology The dominance of aesthetics in contemporary European culture and the depreciation of the word47 call for an attractive and uncritical aesthetic missiology, with an aesthetic theology for its content. We set an ambivalent and critical missiology in opposition to this, founded on a theological aesthetics. An Aesthetic and Uncritical Missiology and Theology An uncritical aesthetic missiology can borrow from modern aesthetic expressions, or create new ones. It will have a vast project to undertake which can be separated into two principal components. On the one hand, the perception of the Christian message before people: the domains of aesthetics, experience and the communication of sentiments, the symbolic domain, and the domain of aesthetic needs. On the other hand, the communication of the evangelical message: the domain of the disposition of discourse, of the form and means of communication, of the visibility of the message, the vast domain of artistic expression, the domain of architecture, of multimedia, and of cyberspace. This aesthetic theology, while often passive and uncritical, is nevertheless creative and attractive. It corresponds to the demands of an attractive aesthetic missiology which encounters aesthetic culture unhindered by theological fear. From an historical viewpoint, theologies of culture originating in Roman Catholicism or Orthodoxy offer more possibilities of correlation between culture and faith than most theologies derived from Protestantism, which postulate discontinuity. But the “emotional” level and other Protestant currents have already come back to a “catholic” theological foundation without realizing it. They are completely at ease in the aesthetic culture proposed by postmodernity. Nevertheless, a total rupture as a theological-cultural model is only possible in monastic groups or through ephemeral prophetic interventions. They express an aesthetic counterculture which is impracticable for the majority of Christians. These latter are called to live out a real missionary presence within aesthetic culture. For churches in Europe, the question of

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 280

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

281

foregrounding a conservative historical aesthetic or an innovative aesthetic turned toward the future must be asked.48 While a sacred architecture and ancient liturgy can touch the postmodern person in her quest for spirituality and for her bearings, we must not forget that for most people, they represent a space which we do not frequent. Indeed, investment in contemporary culture corresponds to a cultural mandate, and “missionaries” will be non-theologian specialists: comedians, sound engineers, painters and other actors who know how to create new things within their discipline. A Theological Aesthetics Confronted with its limitations, aesthetic theology will be quickly exhausted. This exhaustion will project us toward theological aesthetics which renew and partially justify ephemeral aesthetic theology. Here, “beauty” radiates from the center of theology, God and his beautiful holiness. The beautiful, the good, and the true are united in him. But this aesthetics is not entirely dominated by the “beautiful.” The holiness of God is terrifying. It strips human sin bare in all its depth and tragedy. Once Christology moves from the Jesus’ divinity to his humanity, it presents an exemplary ugliness. The Son of God is a man, it is true—but what a man (ecce homo)! The passion of Jesus leads to an unambiguous aesthetic provocation. The absurd aesthetic aspect of the suffering of Christ on the cross covers the true nature of this salvific event. It will only be overturned by the morning beauty of the Son’s resurrection by the Father. Easter Sunday inverts the aesthetic category of the cross: unbearable ugliness becomes the resplendent beauty of salvation. The cross becomes a prophetic criterion which radically interrogates all expressions of the sensible in general. It tests their true substance. The ambivalence of theological aesthetics (the “beautiful” and the “ugly”), notably in Christology, thus becomes the critical criterion of all forms of aesthetic theology. It purifies theological aesthetics of its doubtful elements, nourishes it with theological substance, establishes it on a true foundation, and assigns it its ephemeral place. The nature of theological aesthetics is critical and ambivalent. The life of theological aesthetics is founded on the word of God. Only the proclaimed word leads to faith, whatever the aesthetic conditions might be. The word crosses all barriers and seizes all aesthetic opportunities. Faith can no longer be founded on what it sees, but on what it hears. When the human is illuminated by the Gospel, all natural and creational aesthetics fall away, ceding their place to the word of God, which binds them to the theological category of aesthetics (which is eschatological by nature). The word of God fulfills two functions. It is constructive, edifying faith. It is critical toward theological aesthetics and toward aesthetic theologies. The “ugliness” of Christology (the passion and death of Christ) will dismantle all the “aesthetic

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 281

25-09-2021 09:27:27

282

Chapter 5

scaffolding” as a final critical instance, leaving in place only what remains, the essential: God and his salvation. A Critical Aesthetic Missiology A critical aesthetic missiology nourished by a solid theological aesthetics will balance out an uncritical aesthetic theology. This missiology introduces the notion of ambivalence into apparent certainty, an effect of ambiguous aesthetic culture. We oppose the critical model to the uncritical model through the message and exhortation of the book of Revelation. In Revelation, aesthetic certainty is confronted with the ambivalence of theological aesthetics. We could also say that two ambivalences, modern aesthetics and biblical aesthetics, meet each other here: the ambivalence of the image and theological ambivalence. To choose an apocalyptic hermeneutic for a reading of contemporary aesthetic culture seems highly risky. Revelation is criticized both by humanist philosophy which cannot identify with “such a terrible” vision of the world, and by certain theologians who doubt its canonicity or who point to excesses in the interpretation of this book. We must first separate ourselves from certain interpretive traditions for which everything hangs on an historical explication, or on the contrary, on a commentary on the future. We must then restore the message of Revelation, which means clarifying its genre, the role of its images, and the political context in question.49 A Hermeneutic of Revelation This interpretive framework avoids the errors of a purely intemporal or exclusively literal exposition. It seeks the theological significance of the texts and allows us to use a hermeneutic of Revelation to read contemporary aesthetic culture because Revelation defines itself as a prophetic message. We have already introduced the theme above: the ambivalence of images in Revelation combines with theological ambivalence of the same book. Since this book is prophetic, we can attempt a critical contextualization of the ambivalent imagery of postmodernity. The description of the outrageous aesthetic of the Roman Empire is found in chapter 13 with the appearance of the two “beasts” who belong to the “satanic trinity” (the dragon or serpent as origin of all opposition to God in 12; the first beast who comes out of the sea; and the second beast who comes from the earth).50 The two frightful beasts are endowed with extraordinary power by which they perform signs/miracles. The first is miraculously cured after a fatal wound, which garners the admiration of the earth (Rev. 13:1–10). The second beast maintains this adoration toward the first beast and performs miracles in turn (Rev. 13:11–18). Here we are faced with an aesthetic of miracles. Chapter 13 is located in the “book of signs” which begins in chapter 12 and continues until chapter 19. There are seven

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 282

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

283

signs in these eight chapters: three in the heavens (Rev. 12:1, 3, 15:1) and four on the earth (Rev. 13:13–14, 16:14, 19:20).51 Only the first is a “good” sign coming from God. The others express the judgment of God or evil. Signs engender certainty, they “prove” the legitimacy of the person, the power, the gods, or the true God which they create. They are bound to their genitor, who must give them their true meaning, because miracles do not say everything concerning the content of this event. But it is this effect which makes them attractive and produces certainty in their observers. The aesthetics of the miracle generate certainty and transfer its deficit of content toward its creator. The seven principal signs in the Gospel of John (John 1–11) should all point toward Jesus,52 after whom the signs stop because his glorification on the cross is no longer a sign, but the supreme and ultimate reality of the entire universe. It is the fusion of the sign with its author. There is only one reality; the sign is dissolved because its full meaning has appeared. As many commentators emphasize, the miracles performed by the two beasts (Rev. 13:3–4, and primarily 13–15) reflect the military and political power of Rome.53 The second beast successfully stages an imperial cult such that residents of the empire fabricate idols of the first beast. The second beast even manages to “animate” the images of the beast (Rev. 13:15).54 After the aesthetic certainty of the miracle, we find ourselves before the ambivalent aesthetic. The sign procures certainty for aesthetics, but this latter is ambivalent because it is tied to the symbolic animal, “the beast,” who represents the Roman power. John of Patmos thus unveils the false certitude of the miracle because it is connected with the deceitful power of the empire, and ultimately constitutes a prophetic message against every evil power. The ambivalence of the aesthetic can contribute to total perversion. This is visible with the other two beasts. One represents the imperial power; the other, its powerful propaganda machine. The consequences of their actions are described by John of Patmos: the promise of certainty through miracles deploys a considerable seductive power over humans. The aesthetics of the miracle blinds humans to the true nature of aesthetics, which is always ambivalent. With his apocalyptic imaginary, Jean delivers an aesthetic counter-performance. He brings the ambivalence of theological aesthetics to bear (“beauty” and “ugliness” of the evangelical message, and the beauty of the throne of God and the celestial beings in chapter 4 of Revelation). This casts doubt on the certainty of the aesthetics of the miracle. This encounter is the time of revelation (apocalypse). Theological aesthetics dons a prophetic function to denounce a possible perverted ambivalent aesthetic expression serving to manipulate humans, as it is denounced in the message of Revelation. The Roman power is upheld by the imperial cult and its propaganda machine (imagery) to manipulate the population. The image (aesthetics) is here at the service of perversion.55

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 283

25-09-2021 09:27:27

284

Chapter 5

A Critical and Ambivalent Missiology We absolutely must counterbalance our uncritical and attractive aesthetic model with an ambivalent and critical missiology, which we propose via a reading of the Apocalypse of John of Patmos. This means that the metanarrative of the Roman Empire sustained itself, among others, by an ambivalent aesthetic through a perverted image. The end of metanarratives as a postulate of postmodernity is brought into question by the prophetic genre of Revelation. Though we have observed the end of many historical metanarratives, we should not succumb to the idea of an alleged ideological void; Revelation is there to oppose this illusion. And we have seen above with Bauckham that precisely a new metanarrative takes the place of old dead ideologies: the global economy. After “everything is political” and “everything is technological,” we come to “everything is economic.”56 In our time, the image plays a primordial role which generates an enormous power, a process made possible by technological advances. Revelation forcefully recounts an alternative theological metanarrative. The implications of this narrative retain a critical prophetic pertinence which measures each ancient or new ideology. The end of metanarratives would signify the end of history since man cannot live without a hermeneutic of the world. His faculty of explanation seeks to find the cohesion of the world. It cannot be uniquely material, without which man would deny his humanity. Challenges What does this mean for the European church as a bearer of the message of mission? The two eras of the addressees of Revelation and of postmodernity are not the same. But the warning to the seven churches, who are a representation of all churches existing at the time in Asia Minor, can overflow their original time and place because of the prophetic bearing of Revelation. The stinging critique of Roman ideology in Revelation transforms into a warning for the Western church, who must not employ the aesthetic side of its missiological model in an uncritical manner, without which she will dissolve into the “beautiful.” An autonomous aesthetics does not exist; it is connected to an ideology or a metanarrative. Its meaning is implicit and open because unformulated, contrary to the word. The image evokes a “faith” (Hans Belting). The original addressees of the circulated letter lived in diverse situations. Certain churches suffered from persecution, but we cannot generalize this situation. Christians did not automatically have a clear view of the imagery of the empire because of their oppression. Some persons and layers of society were favored by the empire and could avail themselves of certain privileges. These people (with Christians among them) could easily succumb to the cult of the empire. The situation of the church was that of an ecclesia

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 284

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

285

pressa under continually growing oppression. This threat could only generate a significant apprehension regarding the verbal communication of the Gospel. To proclaim the Gospel involved risk; it could lead to martyrdom.57 But this extreme missionary “model” will ultimately free the Gospel from its enclosure in “private space,” to borrow terminology from late modernity. The martyr as an “ugly” Christian aesthetic was an ultimate possibility of moving from a non-verbal constraint to a verbal proclamation of the Gospel. This possibility is no longer given in the postmodern West because of the creation of the liberal state of law, whose laws protect freedom of religious worship and of conscience. It is no longer necessary because the Gospel can be preached freely. The prophetic message of Revelation can warn the European church concerning other potential dangers, including the risk of remaining silent and abandoning her missionary vocation (the loss of the missionary profile, the loss of the capacity to suffer),58 the peril of an extremely secular state which re-sacralizes itself or any metanarrative put at the service of a human perversion. The rejection of metanarratives by postmodern philosophy can hide their real existence. The subtlety of their mediation renders their perception difficult. This difficulty renders John of Patmos’s prophetic message even more pertinent for European churches. The “weakness” of contemporary European churches does not leave us very optimist regarding their ability to propose a veritable critical ambivalent theological aesthetic to confront ambivalent cultural aesthetics. If some Western churches are ready today to ask other churches for forgiveness for the demands of the sixteenth century,59 it is less certain that they will be ready to give their life when confronted with a perverse and dangerous ideology. This requires an ethical act beyond a simple aesthetic theology. The danger of the Western church consists in the fear of speaking in a clear manner of Jesus Christ under the cover of considerable historical progress (the creation of public and private space, freedom of religion and conscience), but carried to an extreme level (the confinement of the “religious” in the private sphere). The missionary drama and paradox of the Western church thus resides in the silence of a freedom of speech which is real, but frustrated by the aesthetic of a counter-ideology. An Ethical Missiology “Everything is aesthetic” is followed by “everything is ethical,” because a purely aesthetic expression of human life will run out of steam sooner or later. Man will thus be attracted by an aesthetic ethics, a behavior which seems to satisfy his aesthetic needs. The beauty of the act will convince him of its appropriateness. The New Testament does propose an aesthetic ethics, even if it is not a central biblical perspective.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 285

25-09-2021 09:27:27

286

Chapter 5

Ethical Domains in 1 Peter In the central part of his first epistle, Peter exhorts Christians to abstain from carnal desires and to behave differently than pagans (1 Pet. 2:11–12). After calls to sanctification (chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 2), Peter specifies several particular ethical arenas (Christian behavior before political authorities, behavior of slaves toward their masters, of wives toward their husbands, as well as duties among brothers and sisters in the church: 1 Pet. 2:13–3:8). These four fields of action were not chosen by chance; the Christians in question must have lived through considerable tension in these areas. The call to submission reflects neither an ideal social order nor a general social ethic, but rather an ethics of “survival” for extreme situations, which explains why the injunction to submission is always supported by Christological excurses (1 Pet. 2:21–25; 3:18–4:1). The sufferings of Christ are the only possible way to motivate a nearly impossible ethical demand. Peter was aware of the extreme provocation of his exhortation which could only serve to maintain the ultimate freedom of ethical subjects: they were submitted to despotic political authorities, to pitiless masters and to wicked husbands, it is true; but above all, they were submitted to Christ, and by virtue of this fact, were free in the final analysis. “Beautiful” Conduct These ethical arenas are inscribed within a general call for “good behavior” (1 Pet. 2:12a). Yet this “good behavior” can also be translated as “beautiful behavior,”60 which authorizes us to speak of an aesthetic ethics. What does this ethics consist of? The difficult situation of the addressees of this circulated letter rule out verbal proclamations of the Gospel among “pagans.” Christians should remain silent under penalty of oppression from the local population because this latter suspects adherents of this new “sect” of harmful intentions and acts. Christians cannot justify themselves verbally, but only by their attitude. These “good works” (1 Pet. 2:12c) are the bearers of a surprising aesthetic in order that the observers could identify them as such and connect them to a moral work which merits consideration. In this sense, the conduct of the “Christian” wife is exemplary (1 Pet. 3:1–6) and can also be representative of the behavior of the Christian community. If she wanted to “win over [probably to the Christian faith] her husband” who refused to listen to her message, she should adopt a “pure and respectful conduct.”61 A “beautiful” attitude is surprising and can lead the pagan environment to ask questions as to its motivation. A “Christian” aesthetic ethic is posed here in contrast to “pagan” assumptions. Peter’s Theology of Mission In this first epistle, “beautiful” behavior exhibits a clearly missionary aim. This objective is visible in the particular place occupied by verses 11–1 in

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 286

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

287

chapter 2. They are placed at the center of the epistle, just before the ethical exhortations. The goal of the new action is the glory of God “on the day of his intervention” (1 Pet. 2:12d). Commentators oscillate between two primary interpretations of this “day,” seeing either a reference to individual conversion in the present earthly life (1 Pet. 3:1–2), or the future final judgment before the living God (Is 10:3).62 Whatever exegete one follows, a reference to pagan conversion should not be excluded. Christians’ “good works” are aimed for the conversion of pagans. Conversion is one of the objectives of the missionary enterprise. Through their aesthetic and ethical effects, these (beautiful) works should in some way unblock a deadlock in communication. Questions can then arise, which seek the reason for this “hope” (1 Pet. 3:15b) and a missionary dialogue can begin. The central section of this epistle thus affirms Peter’s theology of mission.63 These two verses are brief and their content is rather deceptive in comparison with the place occupied by mission in the synoptic gospels. Peter gives no encouragement to proclaim the Gospel verbally, but rather incites his addressees to a prudent mission through “beautiful works.” A missionary dialogue is possible (1 Pet. 3:15), but uniquely upon the request of those concerned and not initiated by the “missionary.” This is an apparently impoverished missiology with an accent on non-verbal mission via the “beautiful” conduct of the disciples of Jesus, who must “confound” their contemporaries (1 Pet. 3:16). The Drama of “Foreignness” But it would be wrong to judge the content of this epistle’s theology of mission in isolation from the rest of the text. The addressees’ political context aids us to discern the theology of mission and increases its value. The churches in Asia Minor addressed by this letter all suffer from a context of oppression from the political authorities, but also from the population. We are not yet at the stage of persecution (as for several of the seven churches cited in Revelation), but in one of its preliminary stages. Their uncomfortable situation is summarized with an ambiguous term which features in the greeting and the central section of the epistle. Peter calls the Christian addressees of his letter “strangers.”64 Let us first note that this term means nothing since those it concerns have not experienced any willful or forced immigration. On the contrary, this is a population which has not moved and is perfectly culturally integrated. Why does Peter choose this notion? Through their belonging to Christ, the Christians of these churches have undergone a change in identity. This new identity distinguishes them from their “pagan” entourage. They think and act differently. This change makes them appear as distinct from others, who now perceive them as “strangers.” This label in some way designates the drama which these Christians have lived by following Jesus. Without

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 287

25-09-2021 09:27:27

288

Chapter 5

necessarily wanting to, they have become “strangers” in a local cultural context which they know. They are now confronted with attacks on their new identity. They feel themselves to be “strangers” in a familiar region, among a familiar population. This epistolary indication and the knowledge of the lived context of these addressees gives a different color to this apparently pale theology of mission. The verbal proclamation of the Gospel was simply hard, even impossible. Open evangelization included a high risk of oppression. All that was left was Christians’ behavior as an ethical and aesthetic missionary message. Peter’s theology of mission was necessarily pragmatic, but it also had the merit of offering theological perspectives in a context of insecurity. Consecration as an Apologetic Prerequisite The pressure exerted on the new “Christian” identity of these people must have been considerable, and the temptation to abandon their “foreignness” along with it. The torment of the addressees of this letter is indirectly palpable in the recurring theme of suffering (1 Pet. 1:6–7; 2:19–21; 3:14; 4:1, 12–16, 19). But abandoning an alternative behavior motivated by the teachings of Christ and the apostles, would have cast doubt, first on their sanctification, then on their missionary project. An ethical missiology was no longer possible in this case. It is not by chance that Peter calls Christians to ­sanctification—a sanctification which must be concretized through the oral defense of their faith in response to unbelievers and through responsible conduct (1 Pet. 3:15–16). This call is both preceded and followed by the troubling question of the injustice suffered by Christians. We note here that the imperative of apologetics is preceded by consecration, without which a defense of the faith would lose all legitimacy. Ethical mission is compromised when its bearers are no longer different from their cultural entourage due to the abandonment of their “Christian” identity. Challenges We can sketch an outline of this theology of mission from 1 Peter for a missiology applied to the European context. (a) First, “foreignness” becomes a reality for Christians in Europe because they are increasingly in the minority. The situation of the diaspora in Asia Minor will be repeated in many European regions. Dissemination becomes the “norm” once again for European Christianity. It must be taken into account by missionary strategies to avoid their being caught by surprise with the growing sentiment of “foreignness” in a known context. Churches should better prepare their members for this new situation. (b) This difference means that Christians’ ethic is perceived and their message can one day be heard. This shows us that the process of individual

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 288

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

289

sanctification should be primarily developed and supported before any attempt at proclaiming an evangelical message. The behavior of “missionaries” will give credibility to their word. Before insisting on apologetics, the emphasis must be placed on the reality of sanctification. Churches should ask the question of whether or not their ethic truly distinguishes them from their cultural environment (where this questioning is necessary, of course, and in conformity with the values of the Gospel). Ethical mission is primarily a question of the church’s sanctification, long before the question of any kind of apologetic strategy comes up. The European public is particularly sensitive to the behavior of Christians because of the history of Christianization. If Christianity has no viable alternative to propose, notably in the sensitive domains of money, power, and human relations, it cannot hope that a message inspiring such behaviors can be heard. (c) Christians’ sentiment of being “foreigners” in Europe is even more complex insofar as, historically speaking, Christianity is “at home.” In Asia Minor the first communities were newborns, while today our continent can rely on a rich history influenced by Christianity. Historical monuments and cultural words are perfectly integrated in the European cultural landscape. But the break with the Christian tradition means that the evangelical message is hardly perceptible in the cultural heritage of Christianity. A double difference thus weighs on Christians: a “foreignness” with the evangelical message having become unknown, and a foreignness despite the presence of Christian cultural “vestiges.” Either the church will bear the weight of such an exposition of foreignness, or she will bow to the cultural pressure of her entourage. The price of a critical contextualization of the Gospel will necessarily filter through a church living out sanctification. A renewed reflection, a different attitude, and a new behavior are the premises of an ethical missiology. They can incite a positive confusion from our peers thanks to the Gospel, and before God. An Ecclesiological Missiology After the “beautiful” (the first circle in our model) and the “good” (second circle), we now turn to the “true,” the third circle in a provisory aestheticeschatological missiology of crisis. An Aesthetic Ethic An aesthetic ethic motivated by Christ provokes the interest of its entourage. This is the missiological model of the second circle. The “Christian” ethic is in contrast with that of other persons in society. This alternative of contrasted life produces a palpable effect, whether attraction (due to its radicality) or

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 289

25-09-2021 09:27:27

290

Chapter 5

repulsion (due to the surplus of inacceptable difference). What captivates the ethical subject today in postmodernity is not necessarily foreignness, or still less the moral content of a human existence, but the authenticity of their experience; that is, the accomplishment of a moral position which is partial, but nevertheless real. The notion of authenticity in broad sense indicates the quality of a person who is true. Their sincerity is connected to a profound truth which goes beyond appearances. But this “truth” is “individualized,” no longer having anything to do with an idea of “truth” which exceeds this personal framework. The postmodern person’s hope for authenticity from others encounters aesthetic ethics among Christians, according to the second missionary “link” in our model. This aesthetic ethics is both attractive and fragile. It needs legitimation and a foundation beyond the sought-for authentic affect. (a) The Christian individual, the authentic “saint,”65 points back to a “group” who lives the same values. Postmodern man “without” God seeks a legitimation through observed alternative Christian living. He finds this legitimation in a “group” which shares the values of the individual Christian. This “group” suggests that this new individual behavior does not result from some aberrant exoticism, but indeed, from a “thought-out” model of life. As individualist as it might be, an ethic always needs to be legitimated by others.66 This is the passage from individual morality to collective morality. (b) The “group” can offer the keys to the foundation of its ethic. It points back to the source which waters and renews its thoughts, attitudes, and acts. This group’s ethic is nourished by a spirituality, a discourse, and a metanarrative. An “Anonymous” Ecclesiology The individual aesthetic ethic tends toward a group of people as a space of legitimation, and the group redirects onlookers toward its discourse. Now, for the observer, this counts as one discourse among others. The specification of the discourse can intervene in this group through the experience of the word of God. It is a different and performative Christian discourse which culminates in an experience of initiation to the Christian faith. The word of God here means the biblical message contextualized and dynamized by the Holy Spirit. An Aesthetic Ecclesiology Before experiencing of the word of God, we define our ecclesiology as aesthetic. The church “attracts” unbelievers by the contrast of its aesthetic ethic and offers them a collective legitimacy for their new individual morality. The vision of persons without knowledge of God corresponds to this

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 290

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

291

ecclesiological perspective (of aesthetic ecclesiology). For such persons, the church is a group linked by common interest which proposes a “plausible apologetic structure.” Its alternative morality and its strange discourse are counterbalanced by the legitimate effect of the collective life and authenticity of its members. Their coming near to this “group” will come about through a balance between the fear and the attraction of the new. Members of the church will attend to the elements which constitute their “attractiveness”: an aesthetic theology in various expressions, and an aesthetic ethics. This aesthetic ecclesiology (from a Christian perspective) and this anonymous ecclesiology (from an unbeliever’s perspective) dissolve under the effect of the word of God, which will extract the aesthetic from the former and the plausibility from the latter to institute a new ecclesiology, with the whole founded on the word of God. The Biblical Model of “Salt and Light” A biblical missiological model which this ecclesiological missiology represents can be found in Matthew 5:13–16, a text situated at the beginning of the sermon on the mount, just after the beatitudes (Matt. 5–7). The dominant note of Jesus’ discourse here is unquestionably ethical, a morality particularly addressed to his disciples. Jesus uses two images to qualify the disciples. Salt characterizes the new identity of the believer and her ethical impact on her environment. She is set apart from her alimentary environment by her flavor and her preserving effect. This image implies an ethic which offers contrast between believers and the non-Christian world. The delicate moment of morality is secondary in this image, while its content is given priority. The new identity given by Jesus ushers in a radically new behavior which contests the values of her environment. But this opposition will have a positive effect of preservation on society. The image of light is full of the same meaning, but the aesthetic ethic is given more emphasis here. The “light” of the disciples’ new behavior is compared to a city on a hill (Matt. 5:14). Hiding it would amount to denying its function (Matt. 5:15). Jesus lays the cornerstone of an ethic for his disciples, but also of an ecclesiology. It is founded upon a logic of separation (two identities, two different ethics for disciples and for the “world”) and of attraction, with the foregrounded disciples “attracting” the “world” to turn toward God. This ecclesiology contains an aesthetic element in the sense of the “light which shines.” It captivates those around it. 1 Peter and Matthew 5 This text’s connections with the preceding missiological model (drawn from 1 Pet. 2:11–12) are striking, since the “light” in Matthew is specified as “good works” (Matt. 5:16). This is the same expression used by Peter. The kalos

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 291

25-09-2021 09:27:27

292

Chapter 5

takes on the same meaning of “beautiful and good actions.”67 The glory of God as the goal of this new ethic is also stipulated by both authors. Nevertheless, in Matthew this objective seems more to be realized in the present, while in Peter the future aspect is dominant. In Matthew, Jesus founds his church (though only in embryonic, pre-paschal stages for the time being) with his words “you are.” He assigns it its ethical role with an aim toward its witness to persons outside of this church. Thus the missionary role is born, and we can speak of an ecclesiological missiology. A Universal, Non-Verbal Mission First, our reflections moved from an anonymous ecclesiology to an aesthetic ecclesiology. Next, we described the dominant ethic of this ecclesiology, which dovetails, thirdly, with the church’s ethical character and its missionary role. Now we must deepen the missionary element, sine it is not self-evident. (a) First of all, the following problem poses itself: we are apparently discussing a non-verbal mission, as in 1 Peter. This should not necessarily bother us, considering the epistle’s political and cultural context. But for the Gospel of Matthew, it is a different story. Here we are given Jesus’ testament and his “great commandment,” the call to the mission of proclamation at the end of the book. Matthew 5:13–16 do not fit within the framework of this verbally proclaimed mission. Next, the problem of the addressees of this Gospel (who are primarily Jews) and its rather particularist remarks (the Gospel is addressed primarily to Jews; e.g., Matt. 15:24)—two arguments which seem not to favor a universal mission. Many exegetes wish to transport this pericope into the post-paschal context since it includes a universal understanding of the Gospel. It is only after the resurrection that the disciples are sent to all nations. The ethical mission in Matthew 5 anticipates Matthew 28. All other passages which speak of a sending before Christ’s death only concern Israel (e.g., the mission of the twelve in Matt. 10:5–6, sent to “lost sheep” of the house of Israel). These arguments weigh heavily against a universal communication of the Gospel in Matthew 5. But upon closer examination, things are not so simple. Even if we allow that Matthew’s is the most “Jewish” gospel, we cannot forget all the passages evoking non-Jewish persons and allusions which prefigure a mission among them. David Bosch has highlighted these “contradictions” in Matthew.68 Instead of amplifying these differences between particularism and universalism, Bosch speaks of a deliberate procedure which Matthew apparently used, first, in following his pastoral concern for the addressees of this Gospel (Jews and non-Jews), and second, to signal his theological position: the mission to the Jews does not exclude mission to pagans.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 292

25-09-2021 09:27:27

A Contextual Theology for Europe

293

A differentiated exegesis is necessary to explain each of these two theological lines. The schema according to which particularist mission corresponds to pre-paschal mission and universal mission corresponds to post-paschal mission does not hold up. Both conceptions are finely interweaved. This complexity is easily visible in the famous example of the Canaanean woman cited above (Matt. 15:21–28). After bearing a categorical refusal from Jesus (the conception of particularist mission), Jesus nevertheless cedes to her search for healing for her sick daughter (the conception of universal mission). The mission of the disciples in Matthew (of being salt and light in this world) should thus be inserted in this complex procedure, not eliminated too quickly from the missiological concept of the Gospel of Matthew. Boris Paschke analyzes this thematic in his thesis, explaining the reason for the missiological content of this passage. His narrative exam leads him to say, rather, that this pericope is quite comfortable with a universalist conception of mission, but in the sense of a mission of “good works,” while Matthew 28 highlights mission through the word, or better, through teaching. Matthew 5 foregrounds good action which precedes the word; in Matthew 28, the word precedes action.69 Matthew’s missiological process is thus sketched in three sweeping brushstrokes: Matthew 5:13–16 is an ecclesiological missiology with a universal scope for ethics (“beautiful works”); Matthew 9:35–10:15 corresponds to the historical mission of the Twelve with a particularist scope via preaching and therapeutic action; and Matthew 28:16–20 translates the peak of these two missiological lines, the mandate for a mission of the Eleven, broadened to include all post-paschal disciples, via the word, aimed at a universal goal explicitly mentioning the nations. The missiological weight of Matthew 5 is also revalorized through its Old Testament connection. The mount on which the city is founded (Matt. 5:14) is a clear allusion to the pilgrimage of the nations toward Zion in the Old Testament (e.g., Is 2:2–4; 60:1–5).70 This pilgrimage is one of the most powerful eschatological visions with an eminent missiological significance.71 The exile of the chosen people could have ended in catastrophe. It would have even meant the end of its very election. But the judgment transforms into a blessing because by way of exile, Israel “disseminates” the promise of Abraham to the nations who will one day gather in Jerusalem in their turn. The particularism of election thus culminates in its ultimate objective: salvation in its universal dimension. The presence of God in Zion as a blessing for all nations fully finds its place in a typically Old Testament centripetal missionary model. The same movement is also visible in Matthew 5. In Isaiah, Zion is this light on the mountain; in Matthew, it is the church. This implies an ecclesiological missiology.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 293

25-09-2021 09:27:27

294

Chapter 5

A CRITICAL AND PERMANENT MISSIOLOGY OF THE WORD OF GOD A Soteriological Missiology The second missiological line follows a theological dynamic. This moves in a direction opposite that of the first line. We now begin with the perspective of God and his word, moving toward humans. In the logic of the first missiological process, the encounter with the word of God was hazardous, to say the least. Now this encounter becomes ideal. God speaks par excellence in the space addressed by his promise—his church. This section brings Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology together. Christology precedes soteriology as its foundation. Soteriology is a consequence of Christology: without Christ, there is no work of salvation. Ecclesiology follows soteriology: it is born in its wake. From one missiological line to another, this section moves from an aesthetic characteristic to a theological foundation of ecclesiology. The realization of this theological missiological dynamic is confided to the third person of the trinity, who “is the post-paschal agent of the eschatological preaching of Jesus.” This link between the Holy Spirit and the word of God is possible thanks to the “submission” of the Holy Spirit to Christ as “servant,” despite an identity of functions shared among the two persons (John 16:13–15). This is the typically Johannine contribution to pneumatology.72 The paraklêtos is at the service of Christ, and consequently, of his word. In this section, we specify our conception of the three systematic domains, preceded by a definition of the “word of God.” The Word of God As a collection of historical divine revelations reconstituted in the Bible, the word of God has the logos of God as the incarnate word of God for its center. The message of this “library,” the coming of his son, his suffering, his death and resurrection, is called the “Gospel.” This is not simply an historical document; it is the acting word of God which changes human existence. The Protestant Reformation brought back the centrality and authority of scripture in opposition to any instance of its leveling out by the Christian tradition. For Luther, the word of God is understood as a “means of grace,” since it conveys the central message of the Gospel (his discovery of God’s justice in the justification of the sinner by grace) and because it effects salvation (medium salutis). The “new hermeneutic” of the German school starting in the 1960s postulates the word of God as an “event of the word.” Systematic theologian Gerhard Ebeling draws on Martin Luther and Rudolf Bultmann in the combination

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 294

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

295

of his own hermeneutic approach to the word of god in an acting and existential perspective. He thus conceives a “theory of theological language” which is a “language of faith.” For Ebeling, the three types of language are: speaking about God (theology), speaking to God (prayer), and speaking from the perspective of God (preaching and the confession of faith).73 Oswald Bayer, systematician emeritus at Tubingen, does not follow exactly the same line, even though he also considers faith as a language event. His distinguishes his approach from Ebeling’s more subjective approach. The object of Christian theology consists in the analysis of the event of language between the God who justifies and the justified sinful man. Bayer orients himself toward the theology of the word and the promise in Luther. He does not situate the theological turn of the reformer in the justification by grace by means of faith, but in the promise of God which allows for a language event which liberates and offers assurance (of salvation).74 Lastly, in our missiological study it is important to recall the understanding of the word of God in Protestant missiology. It is no surprise if the Protestant missionary movement’s understanding of scripture is primarily founded on the views of the Reformation and Pietism, since the theology of universal mission and its realization by missionary societies only begins in the eighteenth century. It is essentially carried by the vital forces of Pietism. The Reformation scriptural principle is lightly expanded by the pietist contribution: we move from sola scriptura to tota scriptura. The subjective accent of the Christian faith is given more emphasis than the objective accent. Pietist theologians emphasize that the scripture’s claritas demands the illumination of the “heart” by the Holy Spirit. A theologia regenitorum (theology of the regenerated) logically follows this theological effort. The center of interest shifts to the strength and efficacy of the word of God which ought to correspond to its proclaimed truth. Another central point concerns the theology of the history of salvation, notably developed by Johann Albrecht Bengel, which becomes the dominant hermeneutical principle among his Wurtemburg students in the German theological school which bears his name (von Hoffmann, Beck, and Auberlen in the nineteenth century) and among the father of Protestant Missiology, Gustav Warneck. This line continues until the twentieth century, renewed by missiologists Karl Hartenstein (notably influenced by Oscar Cullmann) and Walter Freytag.75 Changes in the understanding of the word of God in missionary milieux followed in the 1950s–60s, when the ecumenical movement was obliged to confront a significant divergence in the understanding and interpretation of scripture. German missiologist emeritus Peter Beyerhaus speaks of a “hermeneutical crisis of mission.”76 What followed played on the fundamental antagonism between the understandings of the ecumenical faction (an assumed

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 295

25-09-2021 09:27:28

296

Chapter 5

pluralism of scriptology)77 and the evangelical faction (a pneumatological understanding and a salvation-historical scriptural hermeneutic). The lines between these oppositions are not as impermeable today, since evangelicalism tends toward greater theological plurality and because the ecumenical movement is seeing efforts toward a rapprochement with evangelicals. Ecclesiology When joined to the action of the Holy Spirit, the written or proclaimed word of God (Karl Barth) constitutes the believing subject through the experience of conversion. This is the initial encounter of the human with the resurrected Christ. The word of God gathers the believers and the Holy Spirit incorporates them into the mystical body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13) through baptism of the Spirit.78 For the Reformers, this gathering corresponds to the first and most succinct definition of the church. In Luther’s words, “Where the word is, there is the Church.”79 The Holy Spirit gives unity and connects the members of the communion sanctorum. He thus accomplishes the promise of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20). Pneumatological “geography” situates the spirit under the new covenant among believers (1 Cor 6:17–20) and in his church (1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21–22). Gathered together under the effects of the word and the Spirit, the church is realized as an event and an institution. This was demonstrated by Neuchatel theologian Jean-Louis Leuba in his doctoral thesis, surmounting the old Protestant-Catholic cleavage. Roman Catholics traditionally emphasize the institutional aspect of the church, while Protestants foreground the freedom of the Spirit, the diversity of gifts, and the universal priesthood (the church as event). Leuba dissects both ecclesiological aspects, which he already finds in the New Testament: in Christology (the titles of Christ), in an understanding of the apostolate (the apostolate of the twelve and of Paul), and also in ecclesiology (the ministries and gifts).80 The Spirit and the word of God are the two essential elements of the theological foundation of ecclesiology. The church develops and is realized through (momentary) events and (in the long term) through a structure. The two aspects are indissociable and indispensable, even in postmodernity. We could situate the event-like moment of the church in its central gathering, the worship service. All that contributes to the longevity of its existence, the advancement of Christians in sanctification, and the organization of the church with an aim toward the realization of its mission, will end up sooner or later taking an institutional form. The church is the first missionary space par excellence; the word of God is announced here, and we can expect the presence of the Holy Spirit. That said, under the impetus of the Holy Spirit, the church’s purely aesthetic attraction (presented in our first missiological line) now takes on a centripetal missiological character. An inexistant church

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 296

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

297

cannot flourish; she must attend to the solidarity of existing churches who are ready, in their own missionary dispersion, according to their Master’s commission (Matt. 28). And the centrifugal missionary movement is thus created, which inserts disciples in the Spirit’s sending by the Father and the Son as a prolongation of the ministry of Jesus.81 Soteriology (a) We have discussed the contradictions of the postmodern person in her quest for healing and self-development in chapter 4. The vestiges of New Testament salvation are not yet visible in the quest for earthly well-being because the human has declared herself to be autonomous ever since the Enlightenment. Today we cannot choose to go back, because this selffoundation constitutes an ultimate consequence of the influences of modernity. Human needs (identity, dignity, unity) and ethical challenges (success, defining good and evil, freedom) push toward pleasure maximizing behavior (hedonism) on the one hand, and an outrageous preservation of life on the other. This quest remains ambiguous because the proclaimed autonomy of her being and immense freedom of ethical choice run up against the solitude of her individual choice and her quest for legitimacy from others despite her postulated autonomy and embarrassment before her reason, which cannot manage to confront all the problems she encounters. (b) Our response consisted in addressing these human needs, which allowed us to propose several possible rapprochements with certain aspects of New testament salvation. In a broad sense, “salvation” can also imply healing, which connects with this quest of our peers. Part of “Reconciliation” (in human relationships) is directed toward the current social challenges for humanity. The displacement of the accent of transcendental salvation toward physical and psychic healing generally allows for a return in the opposite direction: the reminder of a salvation which surpasses our simple earthly well-being, and which proposes a therapeutic component as a consequence. (c) But this section is following the theological dynamic: the salvation of God moves toward humanity. This movement corresponds to the path of the Son of God, his self-abasement, his incarnation, his kenosis, his passion, his death, his resurrection, and his glorification. First, we will focus on the beneficial effects, and second, on the heart of the salvation which Jesus Christ offers. Beyond the positive historical benefits of Christianity in the West, we insist (along with missiologist Jochen Teuffel) on “dietetics,”82 the teaching of “well-being,” which ends in an increased quality of life. The effects of salvation should also bear fruits in the ethical domain, the management of one’s professional, emotional, and familial life. Salvation also increases persons’

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 297

25-09-2021 09:27:28

298

Chapter 5

sociability. We might laugh at churches in Europe, but who still cares for the poor and weak today other than those motivated by humanism? Where is this famous social mixing touted by democratic states practiced, even partially, if not in local communities? But its effects are not yet the event of salvation. As with the three other sections on the first aesthetic-eschatological missionary line, we sketch the work of salvation with the help of a theology of mission from a biblical book. (d) No gospel develops this theme as much as Luke in his two-part work.83 The salvation inaugurated by Jesus Christ is a fundamental theme (occurring twelve times in Luke and Acts). Luke is the only evangelist to call Jesus “savior” (Luke 2:11; Acts 5:31, 13:23). This theme is particularly connected to this author’s theology of mission.84 “Salvation” forms the unity of this diptych. The narratives of Jesus’ childhood have an important place in this gospel, and include four passages concerning “salvation.” The first two are found in Zachariah’s benedictus. He emphasizes the continuity of the Davidic promise concerning the future Messiah (Luke 1:69: a “horn of salvation”) and “an Old Testament expression of New Testament reality” (Luke 1:71: “saved from our enemies” [in language from Exodus]).85 The third verse is inserted in a prophecy concerning John the Baptist, Zachariah’s child, who will prepare the way of the one who gives “knowledge of salvation to his people by the forgiveness of their sins” (Luke 1:77). The fourth citation is situated in the nunc dimittis of Simeon (Luke 2:30). This “righteous” one can now lay claim to having seen “salvation” in the person of the infant Jesus in his arms. He sees the destination of this salvation well before his own people, as the “light for the nations” (Luke 2:32).86 Together, these four passages form the opening of this whole, the beginning of the Gospel, while the finale in Acts cites Paul who observes his own people’s refusal when confronted with the Gospel, and the consequent sending of salvation to pagans (Acts 28:28). The beginning of this whole includes salvation within missionary particularism (the “nations” in Luke 2:30). The end of the whole coincides with the open end of Acts and its clearly universal perspective, directed toward “pagans.” Places go together with this missiological line in the construction of the narrative in Luke. The Gospel begins in the holy place of the temple in Jerusalem and finishes in the temple. In the beginning of Acts, Jerusalem is once more the center; Rome, the center of the pagan world, completes this line in the end. In the Gospel of Luke, mission remains largely within the limits of the chosen people. In Acts, the Gospel overflows this particularist boundary. The center of the whole culminates in the mission command, with its particular content in comparison with other Gospel “commands” (Luke 24:47). Mission is defined here as the message of “repentance and forgiveness of sins.” These strong theological notions are added onto the same semantic field of “salvation.” Incidentally, they also constitute a very

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 298

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

299

strong theological accent in this gospel. Luke’s theology of mission is situated between the two poles of the addressees of the Gospel, between particularism (Luke) and universalism (Acts). The content of mission is a message of repentance, founded on the work of salvation in Jesus, and directed toward forgiveness of sins. (e) The salvation of the sinner is the central theme of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The death and resurrection of Jesus were interpreted thus by Paul and the other apostles. This heart of the biblical message remains immutable and effective at all times. Without forgiveness of sins, no salvation is possible. The difficulty of a soteriological missiology in the West is considerable, since salvation is not within the average person’s general horizon. It apparently bears no correspondence to the expressed needs of our contemporaries. The primary challenges in the soteriological domain are multiple: how to connect human needs to salvation in Jesus Christ? How should we proclaim a message which nobody asked for? How can we go beyond modern human autonomy in favor of a theological anthropology? How can we reintroduce the notion of “sin” in Western philosophy as a precondition of forgiveness? We have partially responded to these questions in chapter 4 and will return to them below. Christology The church is the bearer of a message confided to her by God (ecclesiology). This message unfolds as Gospel (soteriology). It allows for an encounter with the resurrected Christ (Christology). The power of the Holy Spirit harnesses the proclaimed word of God, transforming it into a performative call which produces what it says. The encounter with Christ is the supreme goal which surpasses ecclesial reality and the message of redemption. The synthesis of Christology, of soteriology, and ecclesiology is lived in church worship via the word of God and symbols. But where the church does not yet exist, the historical community must proceed to its own missionary dispersion, to live the promise in a provisory manner, expecting a new, nascent church (Matt. 18:20). This involves a centrifugal missionary dissemination and a church in the making. Challenges (a) The word of God gives its critical and permanent characteristics to the second missionary line as the bearer of the truth of God. In this sense, we have also spoken of a critical contextualization in which the word of God maintains control over all attempts at contextual relativization. It goes beyond simple adaptation, deploying its creative and transformative strength among individuals, and perhaps also in society. The word of God prophetically

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 299

25-09-2021 09:27:28

300

Chapter 5

interrogates the surrounding culture, exposing it in the “light” of God and preserving it from its own destruction. It will ensure a good balance between the imperative of contextualization and faithfulness to the heritage of the apostles. (b) A church understood as an event certainly corresponds best to the demands of our times. This is a church stripped of a certain historical heaviness, of false stereotypes concerning the very meaning of a church, and of its historical errors. This perspective aligns with our society’s general trend toward de-institutionalization. Propositions of new ecclesiological models, primarily those coming from Anglo-Saxon contexts, are streaming forth from all sides: on the one hand, there are various contextualization models, and what we might call “emergent churches” on the other.87 Their contribution of flexibility cannot help but interrogate continental churches about their own rigidity. But the life of a community and the repetition of ecclesial activities nevertheless pose the question of the institution for everything which is called to exist beyond a certain limited duration. The event-like nature can also pose the risk of “internal competition” of churches, notably in urban contexts. A church founded on this event-like nature can become a victim of her own success because one day she will be unable to deliver what she promises. An ecclesiology for the European context should thus play between the contradictory demands of our contemporaries’ patent antiecclesiology (the church has no importance), of a strong event-like requirement and an institutional component allowing for a minimum of stability as a token of growth for the Christians concerned, and of maturity for the community. (c) The task of soteriology for the European context is to discern needs of “healing” amidst the drama of humanity. The search for well-being can partially overlap with the message of salvation in Jesus Christ. But this demand must be made accessible and situated in the overarching project of New Testament salvation, with a complete overhaul of priorities as well as a biblical relating of the challenges of transcendent salvation and terrestrial healing. The narrative of the paralytic’s healing is an example of such a theological overhaul (Luke 5:17–26). Jesus inverts priorities in a surprising way, first by linking healing to forgiveness, then by giving forgiveness its supreme value. Jesus upsets the expectations of his friends, and probably of the sick person as well. He pronounces words of absolution and leaves the paralytic in his state of precarious health. Only afterward does he heal him as a sign of the divine authority of absolution. Healing is thus situated within the overall context of salvation. Salvation without forgiveness of sins is theologically untenable, which is not true of healing. This narrative surprisingly connects with the expectations of our Western contemporaries, who primarily concentrate their hopes on the question of healing. The

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 300

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

301

evangelical perspective first welcomes this legitimate expectation, then inserts it in the overall framework of salvation in Jesus Christ, ultimately turning to the heart of what is at stake: the forgiveness of sins. In other words, our analysis and definition of human needs and problems should be corrected by the divine perspective. (d) Theologically speaking, the perfect correlation between human needs in search of well-being and the effects of salvation in Jesus Christ is found in the individual appropriation of the promise of redemption—that is, in the gift of regeneration. The grasp of this promise of God through confidence in its validity, followed by the illumination and salvific action of the Holy Spirit, purifies the human of her sin and confers a new identity upon her. The cry of the “newborn,” “Abba, father!” coincides with the first constitutive “I”88 of the human and her new identity in Jesus Christ: being a “child of God” (Rom 8:15–17). Since this work of salvation is extra nos, it not only washes us of our transgressions, but also liberates us from the modern imperative of “saving” ourselves and constructing our own identity. The human can thus affirm that she is truly “healed”89 because this renewal touches the depths of her being. Man is liberated from human imperatives by God, becoming truly human. Founded upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, this individual renaissance is celebrated in the community of saints through the communion meal, the true promise of the new creation to come. The desire to constitute one’s own identity is also expressed in contemporary theological systems, as emphasized by Oswald Bayer: Kant does this by moralizing theology; Hegel, by theorizing the word of God; and Schleiermacher, through an existential hermeneutic.90 In the Reformation perspective, salvation and human identity are found and always remain beyond us. This is what allows us to call salvation in Jesus Christ “Good News.” It saves us through the forgiveness of sins, and “saves” us from having to “save” ourselves. (e) A soteriology for the Western context ultimately entrusts us with an historical duty. Why has the message of the Gospel lost its flavor? Why does secularization pursue its own path? This question is primarily addressed to churches and theologians who are responsible for ensuring the contextualization of the Gospel. Why is the word of the church no longer heard? Why can’t our contemporaries hear a clear voice defining the Gospel from churches any longer? This also has repercussions on the understanding and exposition of scripture. Why does its “clarity” seem to be compromised? Whence the clergy’s difficulty to explain redemption?91 Why, according to German Protestant bishop Wolfgang Huber, do European churches seem to catalyze their own “secularization?”92 We must find the reasons for the theological implosion and the motivations for the creation of a taboo in the soteriological domain.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 301

25-09-2021 09:27:28

302

Chapter 5

A Missiology of Social Ethics The unfurling of the new life in Christ follows salvation. According to Pauline theology, ethics follows soteriology.93 The development of morality is only possible on the foundation of justification by grace, by means of faith, which procures a strong bond of renewal and a healthy motivation. Ethics thus finds its appropriate place in the second chain-link of our missiological line of the critical and permanent word of God. It consequently abandons its aesthetic and individual character in favor of the evangelical perspective and its collective aspect: social ethics. This latter has already been treated by Newbigin and Bosch (cf. chapter 4). Newbigin’s response to the publicprivate dichotomy is the biblical notion of “truth.” As for Bosch, he prefers a theology of the reign of God. It seems to us that we cannot go beyond these two fundamental notions. Nevertheless, we would like to resituate them in our present context. The major challenge of social ethics raised in this work consists in critical analysis of various dichotomies so typical of our Western world which have been featured in many sections. We enumerate various possible axes for surpassing them; some have already been evoked, while others will be presented for the first time. The dichotomies of private/public, body/ spirit, fact/value, and reason/absolute morality do not seem to correspond to a theology of truth and the reign of God. Theological and Philosophical Possibilities for Overcoming Dichotomies Phenomenology can furnish us a philosophical possibility for overcoming these dichotomies, as it postulates the reality of an object or of an idea which exists well before we can analyze it or divide it into different elements. This philosophical approach upholds the unity of the “thing.” Moreover, empirical theology emphasizes the unity of the recognition of a precise phenomenon. We cannot separate perception from its analysis, and still less from its description. Biblical concepts which emphasize this essential unity can be found on the side of creation (the unity and maintenance of the system of life and the universe), of anthropology (the fundamental unity of the human), and of soteriology (as the project of salvation includes the human and creation in an overarching way). From a (strictly) theological perspective, God’s holiness cannot tolerate a dislocation of sacred and profane space. His will can penetrate all places and cultures, which also corresponds to a theology of the reign of God. Theological systems which facilitate countering these separating tendencies within theological thought are varied: a pietist or Pascal-inspired

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 302

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

303

theology of the “heart” which establishes the mind (the “heart”) as the specific organ of communication with and from God; the three Lutheran rules of “true” theological studies (oratio, meditatio, tentatio) which remove theology from the domination of reason by scholastics94; a synthesis and update of Luther’s theology (a theology founded on the church service and wisdom) by Oswald Bayer, who positions faith and science, monastic and scholastic theology, piety and erudition in creative tension95; and finally, the more recent approach of Radical Orthodoxy, which rehabilitates a pre-modern access to the divine mystery in postmodernity. This limited array illustrates abundant philosophical and theological resources facilitating the overcoming of certain dichotomies from which Western man suffers, as they do not correspond to his humanity. Certainly, a theological monism can be neither constructed nor recognized by our reason, but the unicity of God can be perceived by the various dualisms which govern our life. The Foundation of Social Ethics The foundation of social ethics is found in the individual regeneration of man. Conversion lays the foundation of a partially realized sanctification, the possibility of which is demonstrated by the apostles’ calls to sanctification. Believing individuals gathered in the church can form a small countercultural group according to their degree of faithfulness to the will of God. In this we move from an individual to a collective morality. The action of the word of God and the Holy Spirit gather the faithful. Surpassed by the divine richness of his grace, they flourish in being sent toward the “world,” thus accomplishing their role in evangelization and the diaconate; the circle thus closes. Mission calls persons to a life under the lordship of God. In this circle, mission precedes social ethics. It creates the conditions of a social ethic through the constitution of the believing subject. The word of God and the Holy Spirit must first engender the new man so that he may produce a new action himself. Of course, we also know this model’s counterpoint: civilizing mission, ethical mission as a project of changing societal structures.96 These various models have existed in diverse forms of European Christianization in the past, from missions from colonialist times which partly followed this ideal, to models of political theologies which sought to impose radical societal changes (e.g., liberation theologies in South America). But in light of the negative aspects in our own European history, we must exercise extreme prudence toward these models. The way described by the New Testament seems to be that of a “new man” before a renewed society, which does not exclude a common advance of the diaconate and evangelization as expressions of the same mission.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 303

25-09-2021 09:27:28

304

Chapter 5

The Public/Private Dichotomy and “Religion” in Europe The challenges concerning the public/private dichotomy and “religion” in Europe are multiple. We must first recognize the relative good of such an order because of certain violent religious behaviors, which have led to a domestication of the religious to protect society and “religion” from themselves. There are historical reasons for this. Next, an extreme restriction of the religious to the private sphere ought to be prevented in the interest of both the state and religions. Finally, we must recall the absolute right of God over his creation and his creatures, which is visible in the reign of God and in truth in the person of Jesus Christ. The relative good of this separation can be motivated by an order of preservation of creation and good rapport between humans, as well as a certain evangelical idea of the disjunction of powers: give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Each person must flourish with their own convictions without putting common life in danger. Since the Reformation, Protestantism has itself initiated this separation of the two powers through some of its theological concepts and the necessary support of the political authorities of their time for their own survival. Today, we are instead confronted with a privatization of the religious due to secularization, individualism, and the diversification of the religious “market.” For various reasons the state should have a vested interest in reserving a public place for religions, and, therefore, for Christianity. Otherwise, the state would deprive itself of some of the moral resources necessary for the functioning of a democratic state of law (Jürgen Habermas). The moral effort necessary for the respect of law demands a motivation and a strength which will never come from a political structure. The state would also cut itself off from some human and financial resources furnished voluntarily by religious actors in social, educational, and integrative domains. What is at stake will prove crucial when the time comes for the end of the continental conception of the social state, when we will no longer give necessary care to our aging population, and when public power will no longer increase its debts. In one way or another, the state should recognize the social cohesion created by religious communities, which has nothing to do with communitarianism and which benefits the whole nation. Temporally and spatially limited arenas for free and public discourse could be put in place for those who seek to learn about a religion, for those who seek to propagate one, for those who would safeguard religious patrimony, and for those who seek new moral resources.97 Of course, respect for national law is the condition of access for those who would take up this adventure. Teaching about religious facts across the globe, including the study of fundamental texts and traditions from different religions, should not be abolished in the name of laicity or secularization,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 304

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

305

but rather generalized for the sake of these latter. Future citizens need this information to understand the world and confront future challenges of religious globalization. The modern and secular state cannot exclude a more robust return of “religion” in political space, since the legitimation process of the “people’s” representatives in democratic regimes happens via elections. Mobilization of voters always includes the risk of politicians’ overinvestment in the “religious” to win votes. This one-upmanship might result in a community’s religious interests being taken into account through voting; “religious” interests could once more influence political space. The “missionary” will of a religious community, its numbers and place in society, and politicians’ quest for legitimacy will determine the place of the “religious” in politics. The Immanent and Present Reign of God In a theological perspective, the different political orders of nations are provisory, but willed and used by God. But God is augmenting another order, another reality with an absolute value: this is the construction of his reign in the present (cf. Mark 1:14–15; Luke 17:20–21). This reign corresponds to his nature (his absolute power and strength, his sovereignty) and his will to save humanity. This reign expands through the proclaimed word of the missionary enterprise. The notion of the kingdom of God (declined as the royalty of God in the Old Testament and the kingdom of God in the New Testament) is the theological model which best corresponds to the second circle on our second missiological line.98 The promise of the reign of God implies great tension since it often unites two contrary spatial or temporal aspects: transcendent and immanent, future and present characteristics. Theologians and churches have interpreted this fundamental theological notion differently throughout history, often promoting one aspect to the detriment of another. An instructive historical example is provided by social Christianity, a movement straddling the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which developed a social ethic inspired by the reign of God.99 It is evident that the various representatives and adversaries of this movement were conflicted, torn between concrete political engagement and a strong spiritual implication, between society and the church. Even if this movement faded away following the rise of dialectical theology at the end of the Second World War, and even if the situation of its time is not comparable to our own, it can teach us precious lessons about the inherent tension provoked by the theology of the reign of God. This constitutive tension will allow the second missiological circle to hold steady, suspended between a provisory public/private dichotomy and the absolute reign of God in the present.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 305

25-09-2021 09:27:28

306

Chapter 5

A Missiology of Hope A missiology of hope is not a return toward a temporal indication as implied in the “eschatology of crisis” element of our first missiological line (“A provisory aesthetic-eschatological missiology of crisis”). But it will probe the effects of salvation in Jesus Christ which fall in the domain of hope. To do so, we need not change the biblical model which produces this hope. Indeed, the theology of the reign of God (with all its antagonisms) offers necessary resources both for the preceding section and for the third chain-link in our missiological line. If thus far we have emphasized the present aspect of the reign of God with its implications for social ethics, we can now draw out its future and transcendent aspect. Latent Despair To speak of hope in the European context seems like a tall order. Is this not some of the planet’s richest, most educated, and most privileged populace? With so many privileges, are we not condemned to happiness? We do not know if Europeans are currently living on the philosophical bases of a culture of thankfulness and hope. Several factors seem to point to the opposite observation of a latent despair. (a) The labels of our era: “postmodernity,” “late modernity,” or “ultramodernity” imply the idea of the end (or at least a changing) of an era. But what will come after modernity, and do we really already know what kind of evolution postmodernity is? Will these changes mean the end of a European cultural phase? What new cultural model are we heading toward? (b) The end of metanarratives, propriety of postmodernity, has become a reality at the beginning of the third millennium. Political ideologies are no longer operational: at the end of the twentieth century, this was already true for communism, but has since become applicable for socialism as well, and more recently for liberal capitalism (which showed its limits during the recent global economic crises). But the end of ideals (whatever they might be) signals a impoverishment and void which calls out to be filled by other cultural values. Who will provide these values, and what will they be? (c) European political and economic influence is collapsing before emerging nations like China or India (to say nothing of the dominant pax americana). The European voice is hardly heard, despite progress realized at the level of the rapprochement of countries. (d) Demographic models sketch an aging population and a drop in natality rates. Economic uncertainty of the population and states’ financial debts signify danger for the continental conception of the social state. These observations show Europeans’ disenchantment with the promises of modernity and a lack of new perspectives (to say nothing of a “faith” in the future). Without

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 306

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

307

this confidence nourished by moral and spiritual values, the future remains uncertain, whence our observation of a lack of hope.100 A New Hope A new hope for Europeans is possible thanks to the profound richness which Christian hope constitutes within theology. We will present several axes. (a) The philosophical model of “progress” which has dominated our Western history requires a close analysis of its genesis, its link with JudeoChristian contributions, and its ulterior political transformations.101 This model calls for a biblical clarification which purifies it from its past ideological excesses. (b) The central event of the resurrection of the Son of God, with its soteriological bearing, radically changes the perspective of human life (Rom 4:25). The theologia resurrectionis as the center of theology is the Christological foundation of human salvation and the promise of (eternal) life for the unfolding of sanctification and individual ethics.102 The resurrection is the unique foundation of Christian hope.103 (c) Christ underwent the cross, the darkest hour of his existence, before his resurrection. The breadth of his suffering surpasses all human miseries, such that no situation in life can be excluded from the hope of Christ. The new “surplus” of life given by the resurrected Christ radically changes human lives. Individuals’ hope is gathered in the Christian community, which shines as a community. (d) Perhaps the “eschatological office” needs to be reopened, as at the beginning of the twentieth century. But we find ourselves at a different stage of our society from a century ago. We have turned away from the idea of wanting to change the world and locked ourselves away in our private sphere. Christian hope does not predict a better future, but it introduces us into a realism and modesty which analyze everything through a hermeneutic of the resurrection, and which acts ardently because of paschal dynamics. The eschatological horizon of “eternal life” leads to a decoupling of the motivation for immanent existence.104 (e) On the side of missiology, the salvation history school so important in the history of missionary and missiology societies still offers its theological resources which concern an adequate approach to history and the world before a Western culture slipping into nostalgia or in denial of a future, and which can no longer identify salvation in history, nor even hope for any “salvation” at all.105 The teaching of salvation history avoids these peculiarities and connects human history to that of God who directs it, despite any appearances to the contrary, and who brings it to its fulfillment. The biblical model which serves as a framework for these propositions of renewed hope is

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 307

25-09-2021 09:27:28

308

Chapter 5

the future and eschatological aspect of the kingdom of God (e.g., Matt. 6:10, 25:1–13; Luke 22:16–18). Soteriological Implications for Hope We specify once more that the soteriological implication of the resurrection of Christ concerns the domain of hope. Salvation is proposed by a savior “outside” of humanity. He liberates man from a postmodern imperative: the need to save himself. The justification of man by God delivers him from himself and brings him out of his self-redeeming solitude. The initial distance between man and God gives way to a reconciled relationship. The space of this relationship is the place of worship (in the broad sense employed in the New Testament), but also the garden of culture. The liberation of man by the salvation of God also signifies a renewal or new creation of cultures. Without a confrontation with God (or at least with a universal idea), no cultural creation is possible; this is the lesson of Western history. The separation and difference between God and man allows the latter to find his proper place and value. The anthropological overload of modernity, which deifies the human, can give way to a more just and real view of a human capable of better things (but also of worse), of a human endowed with intelligence (but also limited).106 The fable of human autonomy can be transformed into a recognition of human dependance: human life is given, and creation is passed down. This place attributed by God corresponds to human vocation. Since they know God and his salvation, they can also know themselves. The resurrection of the dead is predicated upon the resurrection of Christ. The first contains the premises of future resurrections. It generates an enormous vitality since death loses its power. “Eternal life” destroys human anthropological stratification and includes all domains of human life in a whole which makes sense beyond death.107 Earthly life retains meaning without being engulfed in postmodern nihilism. The terrestrial “ricochet” of the transcendent hope seen above develops its strength when we know that the power of death is annihilated. “Eternal life” thus effectively begins in the present, as a veritable “life in abundance” (John 10:10). This hope allows us to manage the various forces which destroy life—bodily sickness, mental suffering, tragedies, all kinds of problems, absurdities, and even a perceived “absence” of God. All this is foreseen in the doctrine of sin and addressed by soteriology. The human is the actor in these tragedies, or undergoes them. The believer knows they are carried by the hope of Christ, even when there is nothing left to hope for.108 Salvation also procures a new perspective on the body and death amidst a culture which either undervalues or overvalues these two, amidst a worshipper denial of death. This new relation to two fundamental elements (the body and one’s end) offers people the possibility and freedom to live in the

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 308

25-09-2021 09:27:28

A Contextual Theology for Europe

309

present. The “last judgment,” a doctrine treated as particularly outmoded by moderns, allows for precious anthropological purchase, in spite of judgments which must be situated in soteriology. This benefit consists in the affirmation of humans as dignified and responsible beings already signified in creation. Through his expiatory death, Christ was judged in our place. His judgment corresponds to the anticipation of our own by the holy God. He certifies our responsibility as humans on the one hand, and the mercy of God which outstrips his concern for justice on the other. The judgment of God ultimately confirms human dignity.

A FLEXIBLE AND DYNAMIC MISSIOLOGY The Missionary Dynamic A Static or Dynamic Model? Our missionary model obeys an ideal-typical logic. The two lines which play “lead roles” in this “drama” are in some way static. The first line starts with the human context and moves toward God, with an anthropological-rational allure. The second begins in the will of God and moves to encounter humanity in a theological dynamic. The two lines move in opposite directions. But what allows for their intersection, for the introduction of a complex reality into a model—in short, what gives these two “actors” their dynamism? The Spirit of God is responsible for this “missionary” dynamic. This final section is entirely devoted to pneumatological missiology, since the Spirit carries on the mission of Jesus. He directs the enterprise of mission to its goal by distributing the goods of salvation. Intersection of the Two Missiological Lines These two lines can meet in an ideal or exceptional way. The ideal encounter takes place where the Christological, soteriological, and pneumatological concentration is the strongest. It is here that the Spirit has promised his presence in the new covenant. The church is this place par excellence where humans can expect the presence of God by the Spirit. God has linked his presence to this community. In our model, the ideal intersection of the two lines is formed when the content of the sections “An Ecclesiological Missiology” and “A Soteriological Missiology” overlap. As a product of the word of God which gathers and the Spirit which integrates, the church exercises an attraction toward people so that they might hear the Good News. The exceptional encounter will happen on the first line of our model. The second line of our missiology, that of the word of God, can also intervene at

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 309

25-09-2021 09:27:28

310

Chapter 5

any point on the first line, whether in the aesthetic stage (“An Aesthetic Missiology”), the ethical domain (“An Ethical Missiology”), or in the aesthetic group (“An Ecclesiological Missiology,” which does not yet bear the status of a church). The word of God can intervene at any moment in the domains of the beautiful, the good, and the true. His intervention will implode the anthropological and rational dynamic, bringing people onto the solid bases of the revelation of God through the word. This encounter, which is unusual and risky to human eyes, is possible thanks to the Spirit which can penetrate human spaces—certainly exceptionally, but no less effectively—as an anticipation and promise of the future church to be constituted in this same place. The church here functions in a centrifugal mode; the word is sent into the various spaces of the “world.” Pneumatological Foundations The ideal and exceptional encounters must be justified on the grounds of a solid pneumatology.109 This foundation is obvious in the first case, as it implies the specific action of the Holy Spirit after Pentecost, a salvationevent of capital importance. The gift of the Spirit is promised to all believers upon their conversion. The believer and the church can count on this new reality which gives strength and power of conviction to the missionary message. In the second case, opinions are divided: for some, the Spirit is absent before Pentecost and outside of the elect. For others, a universal presence of the Spirit is possible.110 Of course, this must be distinguished from the gift of the Spirit on Pentecost, but it is nevertheless operational in maintaining a minimal link between sinful man and God, keeping a certain sign of God open in man upon which the missionary message can later partially establish itself. The Holy Spirit guarantees the necessary flexibility and the dynamic of encounter in our two missiological lines (See figure 5.8).  The Missionary Role of the Holy Spirit Johannine Pneumatology The identity of the function of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, visible in the Johannine expressions “I am the truth” (John 1:14–17, 14:6) and the “Spirit of truth” (John 14:17; 15:26, 16:13), is inserted in the larger framework of a Christology of sending typical of John, which is the foundation of this gospel’s entire theology of mission.111 God the Father sends the Son into the world (John 3:17).112 His Son accomplishes his mission (John 4:34) and returns to the Father (John 16:16). The Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit (John 14:26). And the Son expands his mission to the disciples (John

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 310

25-09-2021 09:27:28

311

A Contextual Theology for Europe Action of the Holy Spirit

a ic

g lo rio te

so . lm

si

cle

ec

.

lm

ca

gi

o ol

Ideal encounter so

na

io

t ep

xc

E

.

lm

ica

eth

A flexible and dynamic pneumatological missiology

m

.o

fh

op

e

cm

eti

th es

.

s ter

n ou

c

n le

ci m. al of et hi cs

A) Characteristics: - flexible - dynamic

a

The Spirit and mission Acts of the Apostles

Figure 5.8  Biblical Model Corresponding to Flexible and Dynamic Pneumatological Missiology.

17:18, 20:21). The paraklêtos puts himself at Jesus’ service, implying a certain “subordination” of the Spirit to the Son of God. The one who continues a work is tributary to its instigator.113 The specifically missionary role of the Holy Spirit derives from this perspective. (a) He bears a missionary responsibility because he faithfully carries the words of the one who preceded him to the knowledge of people (John 14:26, 15:16). The Holy Spirit puts Jesus at the center. He avoids all introspection in favor of the words, the life, and the work of Jesus. We can legitimately say that the Holy Spirit is the “missionary” of Jesus. (b) His attitude of service also allows him to support the word of God, as we have seen above. The “submission” of pneumatology to Christology creates this possibility of “collaboration.” The various roles of the Holy Spirit concerning the creation of missionary space follow from this. (c) His hermeneutical function (John 16:13) overflows the simply missionary role of recalling the words of Jesus, which is the first role described in the present work. This retrospective view makes room for the interpretation of the present and future times. Beyond his primary work of rendering Christology present, the Holy Spirit gives the hermeneutical key to our time. This is a plus in relation to the ministry of Jesus and goes beyond a simple theological hermeneutic. The Spirit interprets our time.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 311

25-09-2021 09:27:29

312

Chapter 5

This signifies the recognition of a potential missionary space for missions. This exploration is accessible to the disciples through the communication of the Holy Spirit. (d) Another role observed concerns the missionary message. The Holy Spirit here fulfills his judiciary function (John 16:7–11). The role of the reporter of the words of Jesus is surpassed by that of a word of the Spirit which convicts. The “advocate,” the “help,” or the “consoler” of the disciples changes his arena of action, addressing himself to the “world.” He assumes a properly missionary role, giving the word of God all its strength. The dynamic of the Holy Spirit transforms the message of Jesus into a performative missionary word. “Sin,” “justice,” and “judgment” are key soteriological expressions.114 The “conviction” of the “world” by this message of salvation will happen not by humans, but uniquely by the Spirit who once again proves to be the true agent of mission. “Conviction” can only come from the Spirit; humans remain powerless and can only trust in the action of the Spirit. (e) In a fifth role, the Holy Spirit “constitutes” the human missionary because he is promised to all disciples (John 14:17–18). Since the Spirit of Jesus is the Spirit of mission, he “shares” his missionary function with believers by indwelling them. Receiving the gift of the Spirit coincides with the constitution of the missionary agent. As every Christian since Pentecost receives the Spirit, each one is equally enrolled in a missionary vocation. Like this vocation, the specifically missionary “equipment” of the disciple is bound to the gift of the Spirit which the disciple can rely on. (f) His competence is revealed in the development of the missionary message (point d), in the constitution of the believer-missionary (point e), but also in work in the “mission field.” The context of people’s lives, their illumination by the Gospel, the removal of obstacles to the hearing of the word of God also derive from the Spirit’s impetus (cf. Acts). The Creation of Missionary Space (a) Properly speaking, the four functions of the Holy Spirit laid out in points c through f in the previous section (recognition of a missionary space, performance of the missionary message, the constitution of the “missionary,” and the reception of the missionary message among people) create missionary space. The interaction of the Spirit and the word of God (points a through b of the previous section), which are linked to the four latter elements, allow us to speak of a “missionary” encounter—that is, the confrontation of God with the human through the intercession of the Holy Spirit. The constitution of the “missionary” space and encounter fall exclusively within the competence of the third person of the trinity, who is the presence of God on earth.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 312

25-09-2021 09:27:29

A Contextual Theology for Europe

313

The immediate objective of mission is achieved by the creation of the “new man” (2 Cor 5:17). (b) But this goal is a stepping-stone toward the communion of saints, which is an awareness that the co-disciple bears the same Spirit and that we must not place the unity of the Spirit at risk (Eph 4:3). The gift of the Spirit to individuals also inaugurates the church. A sole listener cannot satisfy the word of God; it also attracts others. The Spirit of God unites individuals who have received the same Spirit. The word gathers and the Spirit assembles. The seventh role of the Spirit is thus sketched, that of creating the believing collectivity. The Spirit and Mission Choosing a Biblical Model The biblical missionary model which we would like to propose (if indeed this is a real choice at all!) for this “pneumatological missiology” is the book of Acts. Acts is the historical book of the New Testament in which the term “spirit” appears most often.115 We might thus reasonably dub it the “Gospel of the Spirit,” directing our gaze away from the apostles (as in the title “Acts of the Apostles”) toward its principal actor, the Spirit of God.116 The two major phenomena between Christ’s ascension and his Parousia are the Holy Spirit and mission. If the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of mission, and if mission is carried out by the Spirit, we ought to give much more attention to the unity of this “couple” and reflect it in our exegetical analyses. But only rarely do studies conducted on the book of Acts present this characteristic. Too often, the apostolate is separated from the Spirit and linked more to the church than to mission. Overview of Acts A brief survey of Acts can quickly demonstrate the relevance of this observation. Jesus’ last words before his ascension (as reported by Luke) introduce the book (1:6–8); the author makes uses them to usher us into the book, but also as its structure and to determine its content. The question of the restoration of Israel is left in suspense by the master. It is a secondary question which must disappear behind the primordial reality of God’s reign. The progress of this reign under the auspices of the Spirit is announced (1:8). The “baptism” of the Spirit intervenes fifty days after Easter. But Luke’s primary focus is not on this church event, but on its witnesses. Here, the reception of the Spirit uniquely serves the apostles’ function. It is not for nothing that exegete Daniel Marguerat speaks of the functional role of the Holy Spirit in

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 313

25-09-2021 09:27:29

314

Chapter 5

Acts. This role is clearly circumscribed here as giving power to witnesses. Marguerat goes quite far in his affirmations, suggesting that “the gift of the Spirit is the power of testifying to Jesus.”117 In any case, our binomial “Spirit/ mission” (visible in the “missionary” name martys and the promise of the Spirit) is placed at a strategic point by the narrator. It is strategic both because it represents the central passage of Acts and because Jesus unveils his plan of action in geographic terms. The “witnesses” proceed in the power of the spirit via concentric circles, beginning at the center and moving outward. Jerusalem will definitively concede its central status to the benefit of a pagan city, Rome. This centrifugal missionary movement (so typical of New Testament mission) finds here its principal foundation. The geographic progress of the Gospel does not imply political conquest, but the expression of the tension between particularism (Israel) and universalism (the pagan world) which constitutes “mission” from Genesis through Revelation.118 This tension relaxes each time the Gospel penetrates a new cultural sphere, and is heightened again before the scope of the unfinished missionary task. The beginning of the book of Acts begins with a mention of the particularist pole and ends in articulating the universalist pole. Luke relates the “universalist” crisis of the missionary movement at the heart of the book, the famous “apostles’ council” in Acts 15, at which the universalist pole could have been eliminated one last time in favor of particularism. This crisis could have signed the death notice of the young missionary movement, cementing the status of Christianity as a Jewish sect. The Book’s Architecture Luke constructs his second book’s architecture around concentric circles. The second of these circles, Judaea, is reached by the message of Jesus after the famous “golden age” of the church in Jerusalem (1–7) through dramatic circumstances (8:1–4).119 The third circle includes Samaria, who practiced a religion halfway between that of Israel and its “pagan” origins (8:5–25). The evangelists penetrated this region partly in fleeing persecution. The “ends of the earth” designates the widest circle, the most difficult for the “witnesses” to reach. An enormous missionary “effort” is undertaken by the Spirit, surpassing obstacles and breaking down resistances. First there was the rapid conversion of an Ethiopian of whom we do not know if he was Jewish (and thus on pilgrimage toward Jerusalem) or pagan (8:26–39). Luke explains that he is a eunuch, which tips the scales toward the “pagan” side (8:27). In any case, this man could not attain his deepest wish (worshipping God in Jerusalem). He is doubly excluded from the people of God by his castration (prohibited in Deut.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 314

25-09-2021 09:27:29

A Contextual Theology for Europe

315

23:1) and through the curse weighing on his people as descendants of Ham (Gen. 9:25–27; 10:6–14). This event introduces the conversion of a group of pagans, gathered in the house of Cornelius, a roman officer (Acts 10), who in turn constitutes the prelude to the founding of the first church composed of Jews and pagans (11:20–26). Only starting in chapter 13 can we speak of a veritably universal mission. This is the “first missionary voyage” of Barnabas and Paul. Between the eunuch’s conversion and the group formed around Cornelius, we are also told of Saul’s conversion (9:1–30). The first conversions of exemplary pagans, the conversion of the future apostle to the “nations,” the Gospel’s surpassing of Judaism and Samaritan syncretism, the mobilization of “witnesses,” the creation of a “mission base” in Antioch—all these events serve to infiltrate the last circle of Jesus’s promise. The equipping of missionaries, the foundation of the church and conversions are the work of the Spirit of mission. The actual incorporation of new uncircumcised disciples into the universal church (11:16–17) is confirmed through the baptism of the Spirit in the three narratives which are set in a “pagan” milieu: among the Samaritans (8:17), at Cornelius’s house (10:44–45), and in Ephesus (Acts 19:6). The unique historical event of Pentecost also finds its echo in the “pagan” world. These observations in Acts confirm what we asserted above: the Holy Spirit creates mission space and leads to missionary “encounters.” Challenges Acts: An Open Ending The first challenge is situated in the enigma of Acts’ open ending,120 suggesting that missionary presence in the second and third circle do not end with the apostle Paul’s time in Rome. Luke’s rhetorical process and the last chapter’s content likely imply an integration of the reader in the process of mission “to the ends of the earth.” The prolongation of mission must be assured by the disciples of the generation after that of the Twelve, following Paul, the “exemplary” pastor. Acts’ open-end tasks the readers in turn with the missionary responsibility, pushing them onward driven by the Holy Spirit. Or, in Johannine pneumatological terms: the Holy Spirit, “servant” of the word of God, transforms the message of Acts into a performative missionary call: “It is up to you (both individually and communally) to continue to write Acts!” As the horizon of the “ends” of the earth has not yet been reached, the missionary mandate continues to expand globally. European space remains a terrain for evangelical proclamation like any other.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 315

25-09-2021 09:27:29

316

Chapter 5

The Spirit and the Public/Private Dichotomy Discussion of the place of “religion” in the public/private dichotomy finds its greatest resources in the pneumatological missiology of Acts. The Holy Spirit is responsible for the formation of missionary space within the framework of advancing the reign of God. This Spirit is just as creative today as in the apostolic era. “Christians” of this era were by no means in some established and stable situation.121 The Gospel had to make its way against all kinds of obstacles and resistance. Attacked by the Judaism of their origins, opposed to Greek and Roman divinity cults, the disciples of Jesus disposed of limited space for expressing and propagating the Gospel. They did not want to cut themselves off from the temple and the synagogue since they saw the ekklêsia as continuing the “holy assemblies” in Israel. Houses only served for specific apostolic teaching. General hostility allowed only for a “capillary” deployment of the Gospel of Jesus, carried on individually by Christians.122 The Holy Spirit knows how to create the necessary missionary space in postmodernity for the proclamation of the Gospel amidst these separations typical of our times. Obstacles Yesterday and Today Obstacles to mission from yesterday and today resemble one another despite what is in some ways a radically different context. The “movement”123 of Jesus had remarkable difficulty in appropriating the missionary mandate. It received the missionary “command,” the promise of the Spirit as a missionary force (1:8), the gift of the Spirit, and along with it the necessary equipment of the missionary, and the confirmation of a “missionary” will of God at Pentecost, as visible in the “speaking in languages and dialects” of the Jewish pilgrims in Jerusalem.124 But the movement stayed within a particularist vision, resisting the centrifugal forces of the Spirit which pushed it toward universal mission. The missionaries of the era only began their movement toward the second and third geographic “circles” described in Acts 1:8 when the glacial wind of persecution began to blow (7–8:4; 11:19). But the passage from particularist mission toward universal mission was still far from accomplished. Five chapters in Acts are devoted to describing this transition (8–12). And it took all the wisdom of James, the brother of Jesus, to convince the Judaizing Christians that mission among the “pagans” was indeed well-founded, following the overwhelming testimonies of Peter, Paul, and Barnabas (15:1–29). The church and the “witnesses” could not or would not advance in the direction of this universal mission. And the Holy Spirit, responsible for the accomplishment of this mission, had to intervene spontaneously and spectacularly to set the bearers of the missionary mandate in movement.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 316

25-09-2021 09:27:29

A Contextual Theology for Europe

317

The history of missions illustrates and repeats this fact of the missionary inertia of the first disciples (and later, the churches). It is rare for an entire church to commit itself to this path. Rather, mobilization for worldwide missions tends to fall to individuals, religious orders, or a particular wing of a given church. Today it is clearly admitted that the church is missionary by nature. The Roman Catholic church confirmed this at Vatican II, and Protestant Churches in the World Council of Churches practically affirm this since the integration of the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism into the WCC structure.125 The missionary character of the local church has been emphasized by the global evangelical movement since its birth, included in its theological identity.126 Nevertheless, churches’ actions do not always follow the great ecclesial declarations which aim for mission in Europe.127 The plurality of understanding of mission does not play in the favor of the proclamation of the word of God as the Good News of the reign of God. Even if some believers are convinced of this, it does not mean that they engage in a program of evangelization. The challenge of postmodern mission in Europe is perhaps not posed at the level of the context, which is particularly indifferent toward the Gospel, so much as in relation to the missionary inertia of the churches and their members. As we have seen above, the obstacles are multiple. They are theological, soteriological, and linguistic, most often wrapped up in the unconscious “missionary taboo” of the Western Christian world. And yet, the end of Acts leaves the possibility of mission open, an opportunity which might allow the “Christian metanarrative” to continue its narration in the European context. A Hermeneutic of the Signs of the Spirit The apostles had to develop a discerning mind to know if the various religious phenomena of their times really corresponded to authentically Christian living. They had to observe if the Spirit received at Pentecost was the same as the one which descended upon the Samaritans and the Greeks or not. A positive response signified the incorporation of these people who were not part of Israel into the new people of God, whence the theological bearing of the three “Pentecosts” among the “pagans” in Acts. This was also Peter’s argument at the Jerusalem “conference” (Acts 15:8): pagans had received the same Spirit. Three criteria are put forth in Acts to verify a true act of the living God: the reception of the Spirit may be accompanied, first, by various signs128; second, by favorable reception of the message of Christ (e.g., in Acts 8:5–6); and third, by the conversion which materializes in the act of Baptism. These three criteria correspond to the four elements which form the beginning of faith in God according to Luke and other New Testament writings: faith in Jesus Christ, conversion, Baptism, and the reception of the Spirit.129 The three

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 317

25-09-2021 09:27:29

318

Chapter 5

A centrifugal missiology “sending”

A centripetal missiology “attraction”

God

Transcendance

A Provisory AestheticEschatological Missiology of Crisis

Action of the Holy Spirit

. lm ica

c

ec

g lo

io ter

so

.

lm

ica

log

io les

ial oc fs s . o ic m eth

.

lm

ica

eth

m

A flexible and dynamic eti

sth

ae

Context

.

cm

.o

fh

op

e

pneumatological missiology

A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God

Immanence

An empirical and hermeneutical missiology

Figure 5.9  Our Simplified Contextual Model.

criteria refer to the Holy Spirit, the word of God, and the testimony of the believer. They are partially visible and verifiable for an external observer. Discerning the signs of the action of God’s Spirit is a criterion for a missiology for the European context (See figure 5.9). Its task is to elaborate a hermeneutic of signs, founded on scripture, on the testimony of persons claiming to have lived “religious” experiences, and the visible part of these experiences (ethical change, the dynamism of a group). This is a scriptural, linguistic, and empirical hermeneutic. The empirical part is already discernable in Acts (e.g., in the church’s growing numbers).130 In this sense, empirical theology must occupy a more important place within the European missiological project, despite the multiple theological obstacles which it poses (cf. our discussion in chapter 3). The description of (religious) experience is communicated through language. A missiology for the European context must first furnish an adequate language so that humans might externalize what they have lived. Scripture will probe

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 318

25-09-2021 09:27:30

A Contextual Theology for Europe

319

the depths of religious discourse of various individuals, furnishing a necessary theological and hermeneutical setting for the manifestations of the Spirit.  NOTES 1. Georg Arthur Lindbeck, The Nature of doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age (London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1984); Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom: A Primer in Christian Ethics (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983). 2. We can also situate German theologian Jochen Teuffel on the side of discontinuity when he categorically denies the possibility of a contextual starting point for proclaiming the Gospel in Europe. The church should simply remain faithful to the “name” of God. Cf. Teuffel, Mission, 255. 3. Cf. Adrian Pabst and Olivier-Thomas Venard, Radical Orthodoxy. Pour une revolution théologique, coll. Angles Vifs (Paris, Ad Solem, 2004), “Introduction.” 4. Burkhardt, Grund und Norm, vol. 1 (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1996), 63–66. 5. Werner Neuer, “Schöpfung und Gesetz bei Adolf Schlatter,” in Begründung ethischer Normen, dir. Helmut Burkhardt (Wuppertal/Giessen/Basel: Brockhaus/ Brunnen, 1988), 115–130; Wolfhart Schlichting, “Zeigt die “Natur” was “Recht” ist? Die Aufnahme des Naturrechtsgedankens in E. Brunners “Gerechtigkeit,” in Burkhardt, Begründung ethischer Normen, 131–146. 6. Cf. Dean Flemming, Contextualization in the New Testament: Patterns for Theology and Mission (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005). 7. Nicole Zeegers-Vander Vorst, “Apologistes,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 74–76. 8. For the famous debate on the Hellenization of Christianity, see “Hellénisation du christianisme,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 524–526. 9. Peter Neuner interprets this Hellenization positively, seeing a model of inculturation at work: Peter Neuner, “Die Hellenisierung des Christentums als Modell von Inkulturation,” Stimmen der Zeit 120 no. 6 (June 1995) 363–376. 10. Cf. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity, op. cit. 11. Godin and Daniel, La France, pays de Mission?; cf. Gantenbein, “France”; Jacques Ellul, Presence in the Modern World, trans. Lisa Richmond (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2016); idem, False Presence in the Modern World, trans. C. Edward Hopkin (New York: The Seabury Press, 1972; Rognon, “Vraie et fausse présence au monde moderne: le chrétien et la politique,” in Jacques Ellul, 135–142. We might say that Ellul discusses “contextualization” in the domain of the Christian’s political engagement. 12. Michel Deneken, “La mission comme nouvelle évangélisation,” Revue des sciences religieuses 80 no. 2 (April 2006) 217–231. 13. For this section, we have followed Arnd Bünker, “Die katholische Kirche in Europa auf der Suche nach ihrer missionarischen Identität,” in Europa. Christen,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 319

25-09-2021 09:27:30

320

Chapter 5

Kirchen und Missionen, coll. JbM 2006 (Hamburg: Missionshilfe, 2006), 31–42. Cf. Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 40–105. 14. For worldwide “ecumenical” Protestantism, this took place on the institutional level at the 1961 conference in New Delhi. 15. For this passage, we have followed Wolfgang Günther, “Mission in Europa als Thema der Weltmissionskonferenzen,” in Europa: Christen, Kirchen und Missionen, 20–30. 16. For this passage we have followed Walldorf, “Das Europäische LausanneKomitee und die Evangelisation Europas (1984–1992),” in Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 193–305. 17. Émile Poulat, Les prêtres-ouvriers. Naissance et fin (Paris: Cerf, 1999), 34–45, 115–177; Godin and Daniel, La France, pays de Mission?; Gantenbein, “La France,” 5–6, 66–67. 18. Gerhard Hilbert, Kirchliche Volksmission (Leipzig: Deichert, 1916), cited in Walldorf, Die Neuevangelisierung Europas, 27–28. 19. Shenk, “Culture of Modernity,” 194. 20. Our proposal is not directly inspired by Kierkegaard; see the point on Kierkegaard in ch. 3 sec. “The Domination of Aesthetics and Ethics.” 21. E.g., 1 Tim 4.:1 22. Translator’s note: translated literally, the French Louis Segond 21 translation of 1 Pet. 2:12 yields “good conduct” and “beautiful way of acting,” whereas the English NRSV uses variants of “honorable” for both adjectives. 23. That is, in our view, according to a Protestant interpretation of the work of salvation. 24. Teuffel, Mission, 162–165. 25. Cf. Hafner, “Individualisierbarkeit des Religiösen.” 26. It is curious to observe the excessive use of the term “confidence” in newspapers at the height of the 2008 financial crisis. 27. Cf. Davie, Religion in Modern Europe; idem, Sociology; Hervieu-Léger, La religion pour mémoire. 28. Cf. Jenkins, God’s Continent, 74–76. 29. Cf. Davie, Parameters of Faith; idem, “Exceptional Case.” 30. Even in France, the secular state par excellence, public powers subsidize Islamic religious structures at an average rate of 30% of overall spending in order to avoid questionable and unwelcome financial sources. Cf. Cecilia Gabizon, “Enquête sur le financement des nouvelles mosquées,” Le Figaro​.fr​, 22 December 2008, 1–3. Available at http:​/​/www​​.lefi​​garo.​​fr​/ac​​tuali​​te​-fr​​ance/​​2008/​​12​/13​​/0101​​6​-200​​81213​​ ARTFI​​G0074​​5​-enq​​uete-​​sur​-l​​e​-fin​​ancem​​ent​-d​​​es​-no​​uvell​​es​-mo​​squee​​s​.php​ (accessed February 25, 2010). 31. Andreas Baumann, Der Islam, Gottes Ruf zur Umkehr? Eine vernachlässigte Deutung aus christlicher Sicht (Basel: Brunnen, 2003). On Luther’s position toward the Tuks, cf. Luther, WA 1, 330; Harmut Bobzien, “Martin Luthers Beitrag zur Kenntnis und Kritik des Islam,” Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 27 no. 3 (1985) 262–289; Bernhard Lohse, Luthers Theologie

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 320

25-09-2021 09:27:30

A Contextual Theology for Europe

321

in ihrer historischen Entwicklung und in ihrem systematischen Zusammenhang (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995), 355. 32. Teuffel, Mission, 188–193. 33. Félix Moser, Les croyants non pratiquants, coll. Pratiques, no. 12 (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994); Davie, “Croire sans appartenir,” in La religion des Britanniques, 129–156; idem, “Exceptional Case,” 23–34; Edward Rommen, Namenschristentum. Theologisch- soziologische Erwägungen (Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1985). 34. For a sociological perspective on the future compromise of a “liberal” church, cf. Steve Bruce, “The Demise of Christianity in Britain,” in Predicting Religion: Christian, Secular and Alternative Futures, dir. Grace Davie et al. (Alershot: Ashgate, 2003) 53–63. 35. This is to employ Johannine vocabulary, another term and image of the beginning of the Christian life. 36. This is Paul Tillich’s definition. Cf. Paul Tillich, Théologie de la culture (Paris: Planètes, 1968), 45–46; idem, Introduction, prem ière partie. Raison et Révélation, Théologie systématique, vol. 1 (Geneva/Paris/Laval: Labor et Fides/Cerf/Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2000), 27–32. 37. Novalis, “Die Christenheit oder Europa,” in Monolog, Die Lehrlinge zu Sais, Die Christenheit oder Europa, Hymnen an die Nacht, Geistliche Lieder, Heinrich von Ofterdingen (Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1967), 35–52; Vattimo, “L’Occident ou la chrétienté,” in Après la chrétienté, 107–127. 38. Thomas Luckmann, Das Problem der Religion in der modernen Gesellschaft. Institution, Person und Weltanschauung (Fribourg e. B.: Rombach, 1963). 39. Eberhard Tiefensee, “Chancen und Grenzen von “Mission”—im Hinblick auf die konfessionelle Situation in den neuen Bundesländern,” in Gemeindepflanzung, ein Modell für die Kirche der Zukunft? dir. Matthias Bartels and Martin Reppenhagen, coll. Beiträge zu Evangelisation und Gemeindeentwicklung no. 4 (NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchner, 2006), 68–85. Tiefensee speaks as one who knows the facts in analyzing the eastern German situation. 40. “Religiös unmusikalisch,” according to Max Weber’s expression. 41. Cf. Jacquin and Zorn, L’alterité religieuse. 42. This approach is on display in German emeritus missiologist Theo Sundermeier, Den Fremden verstehen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996). 43. Richard Bauckham, Bible and Mission. Christian Witness in a Postmodern World, Carlisle/Grand Rapids, Paternoster Press/Baker, 2001, 84. Bauckham develops a hermeneutic of biblical mission. 44. Cf. “From the One to the Many,” in ibid., 27–54. 45. Cf. “Geography, Sacred and Symbolic,” in ibid., 55–81. 46. Ibid., 94–98. 47. Cf. Jacques Ellul, La parole humiliée (Paris: Seuil, 1981). 48. Cf. the edifying example of the minorization of Protestantism in Geneva and its recourse to memory in Bastian, “Minorité religieuse,” 65–66. Can we speak of the transformation of historical cultural edifices into “museum-temples,” following the process of their secular desacralization, and concomitantly, of a displacement from transcendence into art? This would mean that the church has moved from the “sacred

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 321

25-09-2021 09:27:30

322

Chapter 5

temple” to the art museum. Cf. the interview with art historian Roland Recht, “Évitons la catastrophe! Le regard critique de Roland Recht sur les évolutions récentes de la politique des musées en France,” in Les saisons d’Alsace no. 40 (Summer 2009), 34ff. 49. Revelation does not fit in any category of biblical books. Rather, it is a mix of three genres. Revelation is first of all a Christian prophecy because its author brings together immediate words of God and visions, transforming them into a literary work which should be read out loud in liturgical assemblies (Rev. 1:3). John is a Christian prophet, but he is inscribed in the tradition of Old Testament visionaries. The whole of his book is packed with allusions to the prophets, whom he interprets according to his own perspective. Next, Revelation is an apocalypse (Rev. 1:1) which is also situated in the Jewish tradition of apocalypses. According to Bauckham, John narrows the apocalyptic genre, uniquely employing its eschatological component, which links it to the prophetic genre. Apocalyptic is utilized as a “vehicle of prophecy.” The common relation between Revelation and the Jewish apocalypses is visible in two characteristics. First, Revelation gives a divine perspective of the world, which helps confront the concrete historical situation. This transcendent vision allows him to expand readers’ horizons spatially (moving from immanent reality to transcendent reality) and temporally (the consummation of all things in the future). Secondly, Revelation responds to the question of who the true master of the world is, in response to the worries of believers who do not see the accomplishment of the reign of God. Revelation is a letter to be circulated, addressed to seven local churches (Rev. 1:4). A common epistle cannot treat every situation as if it were a communication to a sole addressee. The seven messages stop at chapter 3. But it would be false to see a change of topic between chapters 3 and 4. The messages to the churches are an introduction to the rest of Revelation, which continues to address them. The number seven symbolically corresponds to the idea of totality; the seven particular local communities represent all the churches of the first century. The prolific imagery of Revelation clearly distinguishes it from other Jewish apocalypses. It aims to create a counter-aesthetic in relation to the strongly suggestive images of the Roman Empire and pagan religion. It thus provokes a purification of the Christian imagination based on the vision from heaven (chapter 4). The various images, symbols, visions, prophecies, and allusions to the Old Testament are connected through a unique literary composition. This precise composition is essential for understanding the whole book. The historical context in question clearly relates to the Roman Empire. John does not merely sketch an intemporal vision of heaven without historical implications. Chapter 4 primarily serves, of course, to establish a solid and majestic theology (in the narrow sense of the term). But it also contributes to the ideological critique of the empire. In the rest of the book, John deepens and develops this critique, notably through the two principle symbols which represent Rome, the “sea monster” (or the “beast”) in chapters 13–17 and the “whore of Babylon” in chapters 17–18. The images/visions of John leave no room for a neutral interpretation or peaceful approach to the empire. On the contrary, we must guard against all deceitful illusions. Our analysis has followed Richard Bauckham, La théologie de l’Apocalypse, coll. Théologies (Paris: Cerf, 2006), 11–34, 48–53. Cf. idem, The Climax of Prophecy.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 322

25-09-2021 09:27:30

A Contextual Theology for Europe

323

Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 1–117; Flemming, “Revelation: The Gospel and the Empire,” in Contextualization, 266–295. 50. On the dragon, cf. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 185–198. 51. For the “signs” in Revelation, cf. Pierre Prigent, L’Apocalypse de Saint Jean, coll. Commentaire du NT, 2:XIV, 2nd ed. corr. (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988), 183–184; Yves Simoens, Une interprétation, Apocalypse de Jean—Apocalypse de Jésus Christ vol. 2 (Paris: Facultés Jésuites de Paris, 2008), 107–108. 52. The major structural character of the signs in the Gospel of John is well known. For the antithetical sense of the signs in the two Johannine writings, cf. Prigent, L’Apocalypse, 184. 53. On the identification of Nero with the “beast,” cf. Bauckham, “Nero and the Beast,” in The Climax of Prophecy, 384–452. 54. Steven J. Scherrer, “Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult. A New Look at a Roman Religious Institution in the Light of Rev. 13 :13–15,” Journal of Biblical Literature 103 no. 4 (December 1984) 599–610. The “pneumatization” of the image of the beast in verse 15 is explicable with reference to the dramatization of the “miracles” in the temples. Cf. aussi Steven J. Friesen, Imperial Cults and the Revelation of John. Reading Revelation in the Ruins (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 145–147, 201–204. 55. Bauckham, L’Apocalypse, 28–34, 48–51, 104–111. 56. We are borrowing from Ellulian language. For Ellul, in addition to the Roman Empire, the first beast symbolizes absolute political power, and the second beast symbolizes political propaganda. Revelation describes the state with these two beasts. Cf. Jacques Ellul, L’Apocalypse. Architecture en mouvement, coll. L’athéisme interroge (Paris: Desclée, 1975), 91–98. Chapters 8–15.5 of Revelation form the “keystone” in Ellul’s approach. For the economic critique concerning the Roman Empire, cf. Bauckham, “The Economic Critique of Rome in Revelation 18,” in The Climax of Prophecy, 338–383. For an opinion dissenting from this exposition shared by the majority of exegetes, cf. Gordon Campbell, L’Apocalypse de Jean. Une lecture thématique, coll. Théologie biblique (Cléon d’Andran: Excelsis, 2007) 423–425. Cambpell interprets the merchants’ cargoes (Rev. 18:12–13) in connection with the commerce of the temple in Jerusalem. 57. “Martyria” undeniably belongs to missionary vocabulary. Cf. Bauckham, L’Apocalypse, 92–96. 58. The churches of globally southern countries insistently advocate a theology of suffering which is all but absent in Western theology and missiology. The persecution of Christians in the world is a little-known phenomenon among European churches and general public. Cf. Max Klingberg et al. (dir.), Märtyrer 2009. Das Jahrbuch für Christenverfolgung heute, coll. Idea Dokumentation (Bonn: VKW, 2009), or the book of journalist Raphaël Delpard, La persécution des chrétiens aujourd’hui dans le monde (Neuilly-sur-Seine: Michel Lafond, 2009). 59. Cf. the request for forgiveness at the eleventh Assembly of the Global Lutheran Federation, addressed to the Global Mennonite Conference in July 2010. 60. For an opinion opposed to this traduction, see Bauer, « kalos », Wörterbuch zum NT, 812–813; for a supporting opinion, see TOB et NBS.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 323

25-09-2021 09:27:30

324

Chapter 5

61. Michael Sievernich speaks here of “matrimonial” mission. Michael Sievernich, Die christliche Mission. Geschichte und Gegenwart (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2009), 30. 62. Cf. Horst Balz and Wolfgang Schrage, Die “Katholischen” Briefe. Die Briefe des Jakobus, Petrus, Johannes und Judas, coll. NTD, vol. 10, 13th ed. corr. (Göttingen/Zürich: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1985), 89. 63. On the theology of mission in 1 Peter, cf. Andreas J. Köstenberger, “Mission in the General Epistles,” in Mission in the NT: An Evangelical Approach, dir. William J. Larkin Jr. and Joel F. Williams, coll. American Society of Missiology Series No. 27 (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1998), 189–206; Andreas J. Köstenberger and Peter T. O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission, coll. NSBT n° 11 (Leicester/Downers Grove: Apollos/Inter-Varsity Press, 2001), 237–243. 64. Cf. Reinhard Feldmeier, Die Christen als Fremde. Die Metapher der Fremde in der antiken Welt, im Urchristentum und im 1. Petrusbrief, coll. WUNT n° 64 (Tubingen: Mohr, 1992). 65. Cf. “saints” par excellence, such as Mother Theresa or Abbé Pierre, who are admired primarily because of their surplus authenticity and not necessarily for the ethical position they defend, which in any case seems unattainable. They are figures with ambiguous identities because they move their general public away from New Testament notions of holiness. 66. We are not yet speaking of a “church” at this point since this is an “anonymous” ecclesiology for the uninitiated observer. 67. For the connection between the two texts and their missionary bearing, cf. Ulrich Luz, Matthieu 1–7, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, vol. I/1, coll. EKK, 5th revised ed. (Düsseldorf/Zurich/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger/Neukirchner, 2002), 294–303. 68. Bosch, Dynamique, 81–84. 69. Boris Alexander Paschke, “Particularism and Universalism in the Sermon on the Mount,” doctoral thesis defended at the Faculté de théologie évangélique de Louvain in 2009. 70. Sievernich, Die christliche Mission, 15–16. Against this interpretation, cf. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, coll. NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 176. 71. Another neglected text is found in Isaiah 66:18–24, the final text in the book, with an intense “missionary” activity moving both in centripetal (66:18b) and centrifugal (66:19) directions. 72. Jean Zumstein and Andreas Dettwiler, “Esprit Saint A. Théologie biblique II. Nouveau Testament,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 2002, 405–406. 73. Cf. Gerhard Ebeling, “Diskussionsthesen für eine Vorlesung zur Einführung in das Studium der Theologie,” in Wort und Glaube, vol. 1 (Tubingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1960), 447–457, esp. point 10, 456; idem, Einführung in die theologische Sprachlehre (Tubingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1971). 74. Oswald Bayer, Promissio: Geschichte der reformatorischen Wende in Luthers Theologie, 2nd ed. (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1989); idem,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 324

25-09-2021 09:27:30

A Contextual Theology for Europe

325

Martin Luthers Theologie. Eine Vergegenwärtigung, 3rd ed. (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 41–61. 75. Peter Beyerhaus, “Das traditionnelle Schriftverständnis evangelischer Missionstheologie,” in Die Bibel in der Mission, Er sandte sein Wort. Theologie der christlichen Mission, vol. 1, coll. TVG (Wuppertal/Bad Liebenzell: Brockhaus/ Liebenzeller Mission, 1996), 101–161. Cf. Gerhard Sautter, Heilsgeschichte und Mission: Zum Verständ nis der Heilsgeschichte in der Missionstheologie (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1985). 76. Beyerhaus, “Die Grundlagenkrise der Mission, eine Krise im Schriftverständnis,” in Die Bibel in der Mission, 163–196. 77. For an in-depth study, cf. Martin Hamel, Bibel—Mission—Ökumene. Schriftverständnis und Schriftgebrauch in der neueren ökumenischen Missionstheologie, coll. TVG (Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1993). 78. The seven citations of the baptism of the Spirit only exist in their verbal form: Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5, 11:16; 1 Cor 12:13. The first six passages concern the unique and historical event of Pentecost as a step in the work of salvation. Only the last reference allows for a universal and current interpretation. 79. “Ubi est verbum, ibi est Ecclesia”; cf. Luther, WA 39 II, 176, 8ff. 80. Jean-Louis Leuba, L’institution et l’événement (Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1950); Jochen Eber, “Kirche als Institution oder Ereignis?” in Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche: Gemeindeaufbau auf der Basis einer biblisch erneuerten Ekklesiologie, coll. TVG, dir. Helge Stadelmann (Giessen/Bâle/Wuppertal: Brunnen/ Brockhaus, 1998), 195–219. 81. Cf. the Johannine theology of sending as this gospel’s specific contribution to a theology of mission. 82. Expression employed by Jochen Teuffel, Mission, 31–36. 83. Cf. François Bovon, Luc le théologien: Vingt-cinq ans de recherches (1950– 1975), coll. Le Monde de la Bible (Neuchâtel/Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1978), 255–307, ch. 5 and 6. 84. Cf. ibid., 342–361, 423–427. 85. François Bovon, L’Évangile selon Saint Luc 1,1–9,50, coll. CNT[N], no. IIIa (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1991), 105–106. 86. Cf. Bosch, Dynamique, 140–145. 87. Cf. Perspectives missionnaires no. 51, 2006. 88. Jüngel, “La liberté,” 77–90. 89. Cf. the relation between salvation and healing in Ps 103:3. 90. Oswald Bayer, Theologie, coll. HST n° 1, Gütersloh, Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1994, p. 438–486. 91. This “soteriological” taboo is examined by sociologist Peter Gross, who emphasizes the influence of the doctrine of redemption on Western history and culture. Peter Gross, Jenseits der Erlösung: Die Wiederkehr der Religion und die Zukunft des Christentums, coll. XTEXTE zu Kultur und Gesellschaft, 2nd ed. (Bielefeld: Transcript, 2008).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 325

25-09-2021 09:27:30

326

Chapter 5

92. Wolfgang Huber, Kirche in der Zeitenwende. Gesellschaftlicher Wandel und Erneuerung der Kirche, coll. GTB n° 924 (Gütersloh: Bertelsmann-Stiftung, 1999), 10–11, 31–36. 93. This is visible in the structure and content of most of his epistles. 94. Cf. the introduction to the first volume of his German writings (1539): Luther, WA 50, 657–661. 95. Dominik Terstriep, “Theologie kommt vom Gottesdienst her und geht auf ihn hin. Oswald Bayers gottesdienstlich-weisheitliche Theologie,” in Wirksames Wort. Zum reformatorischen Wortverständnis und seiner Aufnahme in der Theologie Oswald Bayers, dir. Johannes Von Lüpke and Johannes Schwanke (Wuppertal: Foedus, 2004), 9–32. 96. For Albert Schweitzer and Ernest Troeltsch on mission, cf. Sievernich, Die christliche Mission, 141–143. For Schweitzer, cf. his Sunday morning sermon (6 Jan. 1905) at l’Église Saint-Nicolas in Strasbourg on the occasion of the day of mission: Albert Schweitzer, Strassburger Predigten, dir. Ulrich Neuenschwander, coll. Beck’sche Reihe no. 307, 3rd ed. (Munich: Beck, 1993), 53–61. 97. Such a space exists at Speakers’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park. Anyone can speak for a limited time before a passing public. 98. Jacques Schlosser and Peter Hunermann, “Royaume de Dieu,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 1029–1034. 99. This label varies according to different countries and movements: “Christian socialism,” “social Christianity,” “religious” or “Christian socialism,” or the “Social Gospel.” Klauspeter Blaser, Le Christianisme social: Une approche théologique et historique, coll. Débats (Paris: Van Dieren, 2003). 100. Philosopher Rémi Brague speaks thus of our times: “Values are sufficient to organize peaceful coexistence among the living, since it is not too difficult to love a life upon which, in any case, we have already embarked. But we are no longer so certain that it is worth living according to these values and producing generations who will. To continue the human adventure, we need to have faith in life, to believe that it is still better to be than not to be. And who can found this identity of being and the good, if not the one we call “God?” Rémi Brague, “Saint-Augustin,” Le Monde (April 4, 2008), 8. 101. Cf. Nemo, “L’éthique et l’eschatologie bibliques,” in Occident, 35–44; Gross, Jenseits der Erlösung, 6; Karl Löwith, Histoire et Salut (Paris: Gallimard, 2002). 102. We do not see competition between a theologia crucis and a theologia gloriae, knowing that the crucifixion and the resurrection form the kernel of the event of salvation. 103. Jürgen Becker and Christian Duquoc, “Résurrection du Christ,” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, 1008–1013. 104. E.g., in 1 Peter 1:3–17: the constitution of the believer passes through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who becomes the foundation of transcendent hope (1 Pet. 1:3–5). This hope will have repercussions for enduring suffering (1 Pet. 1:6–7) and sanctification (1 Pet. 1:13–17). 105. Cf. Bosch, Dynamique, 673–682; Beyerhaus, Die Bibel in der Mission, 101–154.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 326

25-09-2021 09:27:30

A Contextual Theology for Europe

327

106. Certain philosophers today speak of “weak thought” in the sense of a “theory of weakness as a constitutive quality of being in the era of the end of metaphysics.” Vattimo, Espérer croire, 27–30. 107. Cf. our discussion of Newbigin in ch. 4. 108. For what Martin Luther calls the terrible but necessary experience of tentation which allows the word of God to live, cf. Bayer, Martin Luthers Theologie, 19–20, 33–34. 109. Beyerhaus, Die Bibel in der Mission, 513–515. 110. For this presence, cf. Paul Althaus, Die christliche Wahrhei: Lehrbuch der Dogmatik, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1949), 95–98, 103–107; George W. Peters, Missionarisches Handeln und biblischer Auftrag: Eine biblisch-evangelische Missionstheologie, 2nd ed. (Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1985), 86–92 (originally in English: A Biblical Theology of Missions [Chicago, Moody, 1972]). 111. There is no need to emphasize the central importance of the notion of “sending” for a theology of mission. For John’s theology of mission, cf. James McPolin, “Mission in the Fourth Gospel,” Irish Theological Quarterly 36 no. 2 (April 1969) 113–122; Wiard Popkes, “Zum Verständnis der Mission bei Johannes,” Zeitschrift für Mission IV no. 2 (1978) 63–69; Teresa Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission: A Contextual Study of John 4:1–42, coll. WUNT, reihe 2, Bd. 31 (Tubingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1988); Köstenberger, The Mission of Jesus. 112. This particular relation is described in John by the key terms “send, come, give.” These three expressions figure in John 3:16–19. 113. Cf. Zumstein and Dettwiler, “Esprit Saint A.” 114. The first notion confronts man with himself, the second puts him before God, and third reminds of his end or his liberation. 115. It appears seventy times, which corresponds to 28% of its occurrences in the New Testament. Marguerat, La première histoire, 151–153. 116. Ibid., 149n1. 117. Ibid., 157. 118. Bauckham, Bible and Mission, 10–21. 119. The witnesses were also dispersed as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Syrian Antioch (Acts 11:19). 120. Cf. Marguerat, “L’énigme de la fin des Actes (Actes 28.16–31),” in La première histoire, 301–334. 121. This term first appears in Syrian Antioch (Ac 11.26). 122. Sievernich, Die christliche Mission, 28–30. 123. It would be better to speak of a “movement” than of a “church” during the “golden age” following Jesus’ ascension. The church only appears beginning in Acts 5:11. 124. These languages and dialects represent the known world at the time. 125. Cf. Ad Gentes 2; see also “Ad Gentes 40 ans après,” Spiritus 1 (2005). The Commission on World Mission and Evangelism was created at the plenary assembly in New Delhi in 1961. See also Dietrich Werner, “Integration von Kirche und Mission: Ökumenische Erinnerung, missionarische Verpflichtung und unerledigte Aufgaben,”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 327

25-09-2021 09:27:30

328

Chapter 5

in Wiederentdeckung einer missionarischen Kirche, coll. Berklumer Beiträge zur ökumenischen Erneuerung, Christlicher Glaube in der Einen Welt n° 8 (Hamburg: EB, 2005), 13–21. 126. The missionary character of the church is promoted in anglophone countries by the notion of “missional church” derived from the reception of work by the “Missiology of western culture” commission. Cf. our discussion in ch. 1. 127. Cf. the two important French Roman Catholic and German Protestant missionary documents: Conférence des Evêques de France, Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle, coll. Documents des Églises vol. I (Paris: Cerf, 1994); idem, Vers une nouvelle étape, Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle, coll. Documents des Églises vol. II (Paris: Cerf, 1995); idem, Lettre aux catholiques de France, Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle, coll. Documents des Églises vol. III (Paris: Cerf, 1996); Reden von Gott in der Welt. Der missionarische Auftrag der Kirche an der Schwelle zum 3. Jahrtausend, EKDSynode (Leipzig, Francfort: GEP, 2000); Das Evangelium unter die Leute bringen. Zum missionarischen Dienst der Kirche in unserem Land, coll. EKD-Texte n° 68 (Hanover 2001). 128. Mentions of the Spirit decrease over time throughout Acts, which demonstrates its “inaugurating” role according to Marguerat, La première histoire, 153. 129. Luke does not always list the four elements together, but evoking one implies the others in the spirit of the “primitive” church. 130. Cf. Ledergerber, Das Wachstum der Gemeinde, 77–82. We do not limit the empirical portion only to numbers.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 328

25-09-2021 09:27:30

Chapter 6

Conclusion and Prospects

MAJOR THEMES OF OUR MISSIOLOGICAL MODEL Several major themes have defined our work. We will cite three among the seventeen contextual characteristics and the fourteen theological criteria. (1) Ultramodernity is particularly at ease with various aesthetic expressions. This cultural quality of our time and our Western world is the starting point for the first line of our provisory aesthetic-eschatological missiology of crisis. The challenge of the relation between the word of God and aesthetics is of capital importance and must translate into an aesthetic theology/missiology and a theological-missiological aesthetics. (2) The various typically “western” dichotomies exert a determining influence on available missionary space in Europe today. The process of secularization seems to reduce this space on the one hand (religion is enclosed in the private sphere), but it also allows for peaceable religious expressions and noteworthy advances in freedom of religion and conscience on the other. We must be able to differentiate in looking at this phenomenon, according a relative right to this social order which allows for a peaceable life for all citizens (in the sense of preserving the order of creation). That this separation cannot be absolute and must not succumb to ideological instrumentation is obvious. It must be approached critically since this order cannot be maintained before the lordship of God (cf. our discussion in chapter 3). Various theological notions help us overcome it: the present position of the layperson in public and private space, individual eschatology, the “truth,” the reign of God, the anthropological unity of the human and the overarching goal of salvation, the holiness of God and the sanctification of the human, and finally the Holy Spirit, who will shape “his” missionary space regardless of all human political and social orders. The goal of missiology for the European context is to 329

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 329

25-09-2021 09:27:31

330

Chapter 6

unite these various theological resources and constitute a hermeneutic of the Holy Spirit which allows for the discovery of new missionary spaces. (3) Proclaiming Christ and his salvation remains an invariable element for every missionary context. Soteriology depends on Christology. The effects of salvation can be partially connected to human needs in postmodernity. But salvation (and more precisely, the forgiveness of sins) surpasses the strict framework of an immanent soteriology by far. The soteriological project of God places man and his quest for well-being, for personal development, for increased pleasure, and so on, in the perspective of a relationship with God. The first task of a postmodern soteriology will be to propose a change in perspective from anthropology toward theology. Soteriology is the starting point of our second principal line, a critical and permanent missiology of the word of God. It plays an important role in constituting a new hope, which marks the final chain-link in our second missiological line. OUR EVOLVING UNDERSTANDING OF CONTEXTUALIZATION Our understanding of contextualization has been deepened and refined throughout our study. We began with a Protestant interpretation of the world which emphasizes a break between culture and the Gospel instead of their unity. This distance is visible in the title of the section “A Missiology for the European Context” in chapter 1. This gap was supported by the distinction between notions of “inculturation” and “contextualization” according to the definition of Jean-François Zorn based on Tillichian foundations (cf. “The Notion of Contextualization in Missiology” in chapter 3). According to Zorn’s proposal, contextualization is founded on Tillich’s “Protestant principle.” This sort of model works in a critical correlational mode which upholds the primacy of the “scripture” pole over the “context” pole. The adjective “critical” emanates from this superiority. Until this point in our work, we have highlighted the discontinuity of our contextualization model. But the very structure of our work (in which theological criteria responds to contextual criteria) and some of its content function based on continuity (the first principal line of our model [“A Provisory Aesthetic-Eschatological Missiology of Crisis”] in chapter 5). In the end, we have developed a critical contextualization of relative discontinuity located between the two extremes of continuity and discontinuity. THE PLACE OF THE CHURCH IN OUR MODEL Contrary to most models in practical theology, the place of the church is second in missiological studies. Missiology begins with a “missionary”

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 330

25-09-2021 09:27:31

Conclusion and Prospects

331

situation, a space which as yet includes no planted churches. We have indeed followed this idea in our methodology. We have talked as if the church did not exist in Europe. We have treated this continent as a missionary space, a fact theoretically accepted by the vast majority of European churches. The church has been voluntarily set aside in our correlational model. We are well aware that the “old” continent has undergone several waves of Christianization and that Christianity plays a role in the religious landscape of European states. Why then construct this contradiction seemingly out of nothing? As mentioned above, the first reason is methodological: our study falls under missiology and not practical theology. The second reason consists of proposing a new missiological approach without the mediation of existing churches, who all have a more or less vital interest in persisting. Integrating churches into a tripolar contextualization model (according to the model of practical theology) would probably mean abandoning a model of radical rupture in ecclesiological matters. The old reflex of restoration would probably win out. But setting the church aside in a bipolar model presents an opportunity for innovation, which has been our aim. And yet, we have not completely left the church out. First, existing and historical communities welcome the product of the correlation (or even co-produce it); contextual theology allows them to envisage certain reforms. Second, humans will always be attracted by a group experience which we have situated at the end of our first principal missiological line. This “anonymous ecclesiology,” imperceptible to an outside observer, encounters an aesthetic ecclesiology produced by missionary efforts within such a community. Third, the aesthetic and anthropological constitution of this ecclesiology awaits a more solid foundation by means of the word of God and the Holy Spirit, which is what we propose in the first section of the second principal line of our missiological model. Fourth, the new contextual “product” can also include new church models, the birth of new communities adapted to the new cultural demands of our time. Our work has consisted of seeking a middle way between the continuity of ecclesiological inheritance (cf. “The Legacy of Christianization” in chapter 3) and a break with this latter due to secularization, which no longer permits playing in this register. We have sought a path between an anti-ecclesiology (accepted by most Europeans) and a new model yet to be invented, integrating both the event-like and institutional aspects of the church.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 331

25-09-2021 09:27:31

332

Chapter 6

MINIMAL REQUIREMENTS OF A EUROPEAN ECCLESIOLOGY (1) The theological consensus among nearly all churches concerning the mission Dei, the recognition of the church’s missionary nature, and the ecclesial declarations concerning evangelization in Europe (both at national and European levels) should lead to missionary priorities in church agendas. Yet this missionary dynamic has only made timid advances. Might it not be helpful to refer to a controversial old theological notion, the notae ecclesiae, to stimulate this dynamic? The marks of the church effectively birthed from a context of controversy among confessional theologies of the sixteenth through nineteenth centuries. They allowed each Christian confession to define the “true” church. The marks stemming from the old church are “the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.” Protestants proffered the preaching of the Gospel, the administration of the sacraments, and sometimes ecclesial discipline as well. These historical notae are no longer questioned, but the question of their utility and application remains. Are we talking about the visible or invisible church? We can determine the marks of the invisible church theoretically, but we cannot verify them. This is true for the four fundamental marks proposed by the ancient church. The “Protestant” notae apply more to the visible church.1 Other marks were proposed in the following centuries. The church’s missionary activity could be one of these notae, affirming its justified theological importance and designating the “true” church.2 But this proposal is not very original: this mark already figures among the two fundamental notae of the invisible church: “catholic” (the universality of the church) and “apostolic” (the church is founded on the testimony of the apostles, and she is bound to the missionary commandment). Our proposal would confer upon these two fundamental marks of the church the quality of an outward mark. In this case, the “catholic” and “apostolic” marks will be both outward notae and fundamental marks. This would be a question of coherence, since the churches would confess not only their missionary nature (a fundamental mark), but they would also be invited to put their confession (an outward mark) into practice. Systematic theologian André Birmelé formulates it thus: Because the church as the communion of believers, is catholic, it is a question of whether particular visible churches are conscious of and accomplish their universal missionary task, yet without absolutizing themselves through a false identification with the fulness of the hidden church.3

The notae would thus serve to probe the missionary character of a particular church. This attitude would imply in-depth self-questioning, after

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 332

25-09-2021 09:27:32

Conclusion and Prospects

333

which a church should pronounce a verdict as to her true state (her vitality) and her legitimacy (her existence or non-existence) before God. The notae will thus change into a catalyst of repentance which could provoke judgment particular to each church. This procedure would not necessarily mean the end of a church, but the rediscovery of the goodness of God (Rom 2:4) through recovered lucidity and honesty. (2) The second requirement implies a new and conscious contextualization of ecclesiology for the European culture (which our work does not provide, but which we have indirectly called for in chapter 3, “the Imperative of a New Contextualization”).4 A contextual ecclesiology implies the development of new structures, new ways of working, and the reorganization of church life in order to effectively respond to contemporary culture and human needs without loss to the theological character of the church. This study has primarily developed the contextualization of the evangelical message for the European context. The same process must also include ecclesiology. Practical theologian Stefan Schweyer moves in this direction by analyzing the ecclesiological approaches of several recent practical theologies, before proposing his own contextualized theory of the church.5 This second minimal requirement is urgent in light of the church’s long history and dominant Constantinian structure in Europe. This history no longer allows for outmoded ecclesiological elements. THE FUTURE OF CHRISTIANITY IN EUROPE The state of Christianity in Europe has been sufficiently developed throughout this study. Missiologist Wilbert R. Shenk lays out various interpretive theories of this state in an article which we will summarize.6 He enumerates seven: • Christianity is dying and we live in a post-Christian era; • Europe was never actually profoundly Christianized; • Pre-Christian religiosity has always continued to nourish our culture; • Christianity adopted the mode of “believing without belonging” at the end of the twentieth century; • Religion functions as a “chain of memory,” but the loss of this tradition leads to alteration of cultural identity; • Secularization has not stopped evolving; • Christianity is declining, but all of culture along with it. The interpretation of churches’ present situation is one thing; a prospective future is another. The various models proposed each retain some pertinence

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 333

25-09-2021 09:27:32

334

Chapter 6

for the present. For example, secularization affects nearly all European nations and could lead to completely dechristianized landscapes (as in the New States of Germany). Churches with high attendance rates will lose more practicing members due to falling birth rates and secularization. They will become minority churches whose behavior sets them apart from others. Religious (or non-religious) beliefs further spread and expand this diffuse religious field. The growth of formal or informal belonging to other religions is probably due to immigration and globalization of cultures. If the phenomenon of secularization is not unique to the religious domain, we should expect that other domains of culture would also undergo its effects (e.g., politics and communal life—which implies consequences for social cohesion and the totality of Western culture).7

CONTEXTUAL CHALLENGES FOR THE CHURCHES Missionary space in Europe is a concern for increasing numbers of missiologists and institutions.8 Our work is at its end and cannot furnish a complete ecclesial prospectus; this will have to await a future work. But we will end with several challenges concerning the contextualization of the Gospel and the role played by churches therein. (1) The general challenge of a new contextualization of the Good News for churches in Europe is situated between informal and formal contextualization. Are churches engaging in a transparent contextualization process, or are they still clinging to historical cultural expressions and cloistering themselves away in an inaccessible theological “ivory tower?” (2) Four forms of contextualization exist, of which only one corresponds to the theological ideal. We have already discussed them in the section “the Imperative of a New Contextualization” in chapter 3: (a). Problematic contextualization designates a questionable process. While this first form promotes contextualization, it leads to an impasse because it constitutes an at least partial betrayal of the Gospel message. (b). Uncritical contextualization is a hyper-contextualization in which the content of the Gospel is entirely identified with a specific culture. (c). Non-contextualization describes a culture’s refusal to welcome the Gospel (ex-culturation) or churches’ renunciation of even undertaking this process. (d). Critical contextualization sparks a fruitful and critical correlation between culture and Scripture. We chose this latter form in our study (see figure 6.1). Undoubtedly, whether in its history or present ministry, every kind of church will encounter

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 334

25-09-2021 09:27:32

335

Conclusion and Prospects A centrifugal missiology “sending”

God

A centripetal missiology “attraction”

Transcendance

A Missiology of the Critical and Permanent Word of God

Action of the Holy Spirit .

lm

a gic

sot

lo e” sio tru 1 cle “

eri

olo 2

gic

al

A flexible and dynamic pneumatological missiology

m.

ec

A m so iss cia iol l e og th y o ics f

l ca hi y et og n ol A issi od” m “go d s an ork d oo l w 12 G ifu :11t 2 au ter be Pe

ic et y sth g ae iolo ful” i n A iss aut m Be “

A Provisory AestheticEschatological Missiology of Crisis

im

Th

ep r an ese en nt eig t a and n o spe f G ct

m

Th

er

1

e

Th

s

1

ou

gu

bi

am

e ag o

Ap

Being “salt and light” Matthew 5:13-16

m i of ssio ho log pe y

Th e sc fut en ur e r dan e a n eig t n o asp d f G ec od t

tr

an

Th

e

ps

im aly c

A

od

2

“The forgiveness of sins” Gospel of Luke

Context

Immanence

An empirical and hermeneutical missiology Perceiving reality Interpreting reality

Figure 6.1  Our Ideal-Type Contextual Model.

each of the three forms to avoid: “not,” “poorly,” or (on the contrary) “over” contextualizing the Gospel. (3) What challenges confront different kinds of churches? (a). Lutheran-Reformed Protestant churches were at ease with modernity; Roman Catholic theology has had more difficulty in “catching up” with the evolution of “modernity.” The Protestant Reformation was partly at the origin of this new era’s emergence, contributing a significant impulse. But at the end of this period, a large part of Western Protestantism has succumbed to its “secularization” (Wolfgang Huber), which we might see as a kind of uncritical contextualization (though the churches demonstrated a desire to adapt to the new situation).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 335

25-09-2021 09:27:33

336

Chapter 6

(b). The project of the Roman Catholic church combines several contextualization challenges which differ according to her long history and her doctrinal and ethical teaching. The four forms of contextualization described above combine in this church’s contemporary practice. She most often oscillates between “re-evangelization” (an uncritical contextualization, in our categories) and non-contextualization (a refusal to resolutely commit to a new contextualization). There are exceptions in the form of several communities and movements (as with Protestantism). (c). The state churches will be faced with a problem of uncritical contextualization, and even more so if they rely on ecclesial taxes. Confessing churches are confronted with the danger of succumbing to a subtle form of non-contextualization. They think they are contextualizing (cf. their practices of evangelization), but these models probably are not radical enough in their understanding and proximity to the culture. (d). By contrast, “aesthetic” Christianity—an expression referring to part of classic evangelicalism, Pentecostal and charismatic churches—is at ease in a postmodern culture favorable to an ultimate aesthetic. Experiences, feelings, images, and the attraction of the supernatural are in step with these churches’ theology of experience. We might thus speak of a “fortunate” contextualization of the Gospel which positively addresses the needs of postmodern people. But is this part of Christianity aware of the danger of hyper-contextualization by confusing their theological approaches with the requirements of postmodern culture? The border between a successful contextualization and an uncritical contextualization is thin. “Aesthetic” Christianity has often omitted the fact that it has changed the theological foundation of its definition of the culture-Gospel relationship. The old Protestant-inspired conception, often radicalized into an absolute separation of the “fallen world” and the Gospel, has given way to a much more open conception and an approach to culture more open than before. (4) Sociological considerations should not dominate theological foundations, under penalty of falling into an uncritical contextualization and all that it entails. But it is just as harmful to ignore these considerations because the church always exists in a certain historical condition. Like cultural elements, sociological factors must be accounted for in a critical contextualization model. (5) A church’s refusal to engage in contextualization because of a concern for orthodoxy leads to the same result as hyper-contextualization: the Gospel is not contextualized at all. The effort to maintain “good” doctrine in no way assures that the Gospel can be understood by the next generation. The imperative of contextualization is central. It takes on a theological quality as long as the Gospel has not produced a new contextual theology for a specific culture and time. 

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 336

25-09-2021 09:27:34

Conclusion and Prospects

337

NOTES 1. Peter Steinacker, Die Kennzeichen der Kirche. Eine Studie zu ihrer Einheit, Heiligkeit, Katholizität und Apostolizität, coll. TBT vol. 38 (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1982; Uwe Swarat, “Notae ecclesiae. Woran ist die Kirche Jesu Christi erkennbar?” in Stadelmann, Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche, 169–190. 2. Missionary activity cannot be simply reduced to the worship service, for example, as in Orthodox missiology. The worship service serves primarily to gather believers for the edification of their faith and the honor of God. Missionary activity here means the specific sending of the community after its gathering, as Jesus gathered then sent his disciples into the “world.” “Missionary activity” thus includes a centrifugal mission which surpasses the existing Christian community. 3. André Birmelé, “Église,” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, 483–499; citation 491. 4. Cf. Craig Ott, “Die Kontextualisierung neutestamentlicher Ekklesiologie im Gemeindebau,” in Stadelmann, Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche, 220–246. 5. Stefan Schweyer, Kontextuelle Kirchentheorie: Eine kritisch konstruktive Auseinandersetzung mit dem Kirchenverständnis neuerer praktisch-theologischer Entwürfe, (Zurich: TVZ, 2007). 6. Wilbert R. Shenk, “Contemporary Europe in Missiological Perspective,” Missiology XXXV, no. 2 (April 2007) 125–140. 7. This would thus be a form of “secularization” of civil religions, of laicity and democracy. 8. Cf. the following works examining mission in Europe: “Weltmission vor der Haustür: Wer ist Sender, wer Empfänger?” Evangelikale Missiologie 25 n° 3 (2009); Klaus W. Müller (dir.), Mission im postmodernen Europa: Referate der Jahrestagung 2008 des Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Missiologie, coll. AfeM mission reports no. 16 (Nuremberg: VTR, 2008); Sabine Schröder, Konfessionslose erreichen: Gemeindegründungen von freikirchlichen Initiativen seit der Wende 1989 in Ostdeutschland (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchner, 2007); Dietrich Werner, “The Future of the Rural Church: Perspectives on the Rural Evangelism in a German Context,” International Review of Mission 96, no. 382–383 (Jul—Oct 2007) 296–305; “Actes de la 3e conference européenne de missiologie,” Paris, 24–28 August 2006, Perspectives missionnaires n° 52, (2006); Europa: Christen, Kirchen und Missionen, coll. JbM 2006 (Hamburg: Missionshilfe, 2006); Heribert Bettscheider (dir.), Mission in Europa: Überlegungen zu einem aktuellen Thema (Nettetal: Steyler, 2005); Werner, Wiederentdeckung; Christine Lienemann-Perrin, Contextuality in Reformed Europe. The Mission of the Church in the Transformation of European Culture, Amsterdam/ New York, Rodopi, 2004; Arnd Bünker, Missionarisch Kirche sein? Eine missionswissenschaftliche Analyse von Konzepten zur Sendung der Kirche in Deutschland (Münster: LIT, 2004); Herbert H. Klement (dir.), Evangelisation im Gegenwind. Zur Theologie und Praxis der Glaubensverkündigung in der säkularen Gesellschaft: Bericht von der 12. Studienkonferenz des Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Theologie 9. bis 12. Sept. 2001 in Bad Blankenburg, coll. TVG (Giessen/Basel/Wuppertal: Brunnen/Brockhaus, 2002); Giancarlo Collet, “Ein noch nicht ganz ausgeträumter

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 337

25-09-2021 09:27:34

338

Chapter 6

Traum? Missionstheologische Anmerkungen zur Neuevangelisierung Europas,” in Bis an die Grenzen der Erde. Grundfragen heutiger Missionswissenschaft (Fribourg: Herder, 2002), 246–263. More recent publications on mission in Europe include (starting with the most recent): Evert Van De Poll, Christian Faith and the Making of Europe: Yesterday and Today (Nuremberg: VTR, 2020); Stefan Paas, Pilgrims and Priests: Christian Mission in a Post-Christian Society (London: SCM, 2019); Christoph Theobald, Christentum als Stil. Für ein zeitgemässes Glaubensverständnis in Europa (Freiburg: Herder, 2018; Hannes Wiher (ed.), Mission in Europe (Nuremberg: VTR, 2018); Stefan Paas, Church Planting in the Secular West: Learning from the European Experience, The Gospel and Our Culture Series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016); Evert Van de Poll and Joanne Appleton, eds., Church Planting in Europe: Connecting to Society, Learning from Experience (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2015); Jérôme Cottin and Elisabeth Parmentier, eds., Evangéliser: Approches œcuménique et européenne, Théologie Pratique—Pédagogie—Spiritualité, vol. 9 (Münster: Lit Verlag, 2015); Gabriel Monet, L'Église émergente: Être et faire Église en postchrétienté, Théologie Pratique—Pédagogie—Spiritualité, vol. 6 (Münster: Lit Verlag, 2014); Evert Van de Poll, Europe and the Gospel: Past Influences, Current Developments, Mission Challenges, Versita Discipline: Theology, Religious Studies (London: Versita, 2013); Martin Stowasser and Franz Helm, eds., Mission im Kontext Europas: Interdisziplinäre Beiträge zu einem zeitgemäßen Missionsverständnis, Wiener Forum für Theologie und Religion, Band 3 (Göttingen: V&R unipress, 2011).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 338

25-09-2021 09:27:35

Afterword

UPDATING RELIGIOUS AND CONTEXTUAL CHARACTERISTICS This book was originally published in French in 2016 as an adaptation of a thesis defended in 2010. Many bibliographic sources predate 2010. It is thus worth asking whether the contextual characteristics (chapter 3) in general and the religious characteristics (chapter 2) in particular which found our contextual model study are up to date and pertinent. In what follows, I evaluate and re-emphasize several characteristics. Evolution of Religious Practices The religious landscape in Europe is primarily determined by the erosion of Christian religious practice (or the ideological vacuum which it has left behind), visible in statistics examining those dubbed “without religion.” Additionally, the evolution of Islam in Europe must be observed (i.e., the number and growth of Muslims, as well as their religious practice). The Secularization of Christianity The process of Christianity’s secularization in Europe has continued. It is primarily visible in the departure of church members from the state churches. These churches have a privileged relationship with the state and can rely financially either on a portion of taxes or subventions, as well as a privileged place in public space (e.g., the ability to teach Christian religious elements in public school). In Germany, where these churches are the second largest employer after the state (primarily in the diaconate and in schools), 339

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 339

25-09-2021 09:27:35

340

Afterword

multitudes leave both Christian confessions (the Roman Catholic and state Protestant churches) every year.1 Various reasons motivate this departure, whether pecuniary (a desire to stop paying ecclesial taxes), general (no more links with the church in question), or out of scorn. Indeed, the various and well-publicized pedophilia scandals among Catholic clergy have at times catalyzed this departure. The drop in membership poses significant charitable and educational problems for many ecclesial institutions. Often, the consequences of this regression are only visible in terms of these institutions’ buildings, and particularly so for the churches without state or larger institutional support. The burning spire of the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris on April 15, 2019, exposed this phenomenon, especially since the seat of this archbishopric can count on abundant financial manna due to its singularity within the French national narrative and its international bearing.2 Innumerable places of worship in France and elsewhere in Europe do not benefit from this wave of solidarity since they bear much less patrimonial weight. Other Christian confessions (notably the dynamic wing of Protestantism— the Evangelical churches) cannot compensate this retreat of Christianity in Europe. Of the 660 million Evangelicals worldwide, only 20 million reside in Europe.3 This number remains stable. New church plants created by missionary movements and migrant Christians arriving in Europe have not managed to block up this breach. We might see a second gauge of the state of Christianity in Europeans’ self-designation in religious-themed questions in surveys. A 2018 study conducted by the Pew Research Center examining Christians in fifteen Western European countries produced the following observations: The majority of persons in each of these countries consider themselves to be Christians, with the exception of the Netherlands. Among the four groups surveyed in the overall population, non-practicing Christians come in first place (46%), followed by those “without religion” (24%), practicing Christians in third place (18%), and finally other religions and people who do not know what to respond (5%).4 This last group encompasses other kinds of religions and demonstrates a lack of growth among them, even after recent waves of immigration. Sorting through these responses, we could say that practicing Christians are declining in surveys and that those “without religion” confirm their second-place rank in the medial data. Non-practicing Christians maintain first place. The study finds that Christian identity remains a meaningful marker in Western Europe, even among those who seldom go to church. It is not just a “nominal” identity devoid of practical importance. On the contrary, the religious, political and

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 340

25-09-2021 09:27:36

Afterword

341

cultural views of non-practicing Christians often differ from those of churchattending Christians and religiously unaffiliated adults.5

Nevertheless, precisely what this group believes should be carefully examined; otherwise, we might misleadingly suggest an enduring continuity for Christianity in Europe. For example, faith in the God of the Bible is not assumed for this group. Some from the same group believe in a superior or spiritual force. We must thus be prudent toward this group. The group of practicing Christians requires the same prudence: what counts as “practicing” in this study? “Practice” here is reduced to attending church at least once per month. Clearly, this definition cannot be compared with the demands of discipleship as described in the Gospels. Surveys and facts confirm the erosion of the Christian faith in Europe, but we must not lose sight of the persistence of a residual Christianity. If we adopt the hermeneutic proposed by Charles Taylor, we would be situated between stages 2 and 3 in his model of secularity. Taylor distinguishes “three meanings” of secularity. “Secularity 1” names the loss of importance of the religious in political and public spaces (belief has become a “private affair”); “secularity 2” names the decline of beliefs and practices; “secularity 3” describes new “conditions of belief.”6 The Evolving Islamic Population Another factor which may potentially change the religious situation in Europe is the Islamic element in the demographic dynamic. In 2007, I noted a Muslim population of around twenty-four million persons across thirty-four countries. This figure (which amounts to 4.9% of the overall population) grew very little until 2016, according to a Pew Research Center study examining twenty-eight European countries, plus Switzerland and Norway.7 The same study gave projections reaching until 2050, presenting three different scenarios. The first scenario is constructed solely based on the growth rate without considering immigration, leading the Center to an estimate of 35.8 million Muslims (around 7.4% of the population). The second hypothesis is based on a moderate migration, projecting Muslim Europe at around 57.9 million (11.2%) in 2050. The final estimation works with a hypothesis of increased immigration, which should lead us to a figure of 75.6 million persons (14%). In my study, I spoke of the hypothesis of Turkish integration into the EU. In this case, we indicated 94 million Muslims (15.9%). This integration remains hypothetical, but this figure from my scenario in 2006 remains still well above the highest estimate of the Pew study. All censuses confirm the continual growth of this part of the population, partly because of increased pressure due to migratory influx into

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 341

25-09-2021 09:27:36

342

Afterword

Europe. In light of the current global geopolitical situation, this pressure has slim chances of weakening. Growth in the number of Muslims can be explained by three factors: the arrival of immigrants, a fertility rate (2.6 per woman) higher than the European average (1.6 per woman), and a drop in the non-Muslim population. The second factor nuances my 2006 estimates, which I instead based on the fact that this rate would decline beginning with the second generation. According to the three Pew scenarios, four Nordic countries will experience significant increase in Muslim populations (between 15 and 30.6% of their respective populations) which ultimately does not represent a lot in real numbers. This is not the case for France (18% Muslim in 2050), the United Kingdom (17.2%), and Germany (19.7%), which are the countries with the greatest number of inhabitants. The numerical evolution of this slice of the population depends on classic demographic criteria, but the forms of growth are submitted to the secularization process on the one hand, and to a reactionary ideological sclerosis on the other. The risk of an Islamification cannot be ignored, all the more so as the “secular age” in which postmodern Europeans live offers individuals less and less of a reading, and therefore a comprehension, of religious facts.8 This ignorance is split by Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment values, two inexhaustible sources for the “autonomous man” which is both an ideal and prerequisite of effective democratic functioning. Migratory Flux A major phenomenon concerning Europe is the significant migratory flux represented by events which postdated my study.9 The arrival of refugees on the old continent has increased since 2010, with a spike in 2015. More than one million persons crossed the borders into Schengen territory, notably due to civil war in Syria. Their numbers have since fallen to 122,000 in 2018. These figures conceal innumerable human dramas owing to the danger of the roads and chosen means of travel. These men and women most often depend on an unscrupulous criminal system. Maritime routes have become the sepulcher of many refugees due to precarious vessels. Different EU countries have not managed to agree on a way to offer equitable support of these refugees. An agreement was reached between the EU and Turkey to keep many refugees there. This agreement is fragile due to tensions between the two entities. In 2018, 330,000 persons obtained asylum in Europe. Most of those applying came from Syria (29%), Afghanistan (16%), and Iraq (7%). The three countries granting the most positive responses to these demands were Germany (139,600), Italy (47,900), and France (41,000).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 342

25-09-2021 09:27:36

Afterword

343

These figures must be considered in relation with migration as a whole and the overall European population, which immediately relativizes their significance and contradicts certain popular clichés. 3.94 million persons immigrated in the EU in 2018, while 2.61 million left during the same year. Just over a million of these persons came from another EU country. The migratory balance (the difference in persons entering and leaving the EU) is positive, implying a growth in population. This growth is due to migration, since natural growth (the difference between births and deaths) is negative. This migratory balance is the principal reason for the growth of the European population since 1990. 446.8 million persons live in 27 EU countries in 2019, of which 21.7 million are non-European citizens. These foreigners form 4.9% of the population. We should thus relativize the figures concerning refugees and foreigners and emphasize that only the migratory balance maintains or permits growth in the population. Neither should we ignore the human resource needs for our continent’s economy—needs which are a challenge for an aging continent, notably for the driving economic force represented by Germany. Must we recall that Europe confronted other important waves of immigration in 1939 (an exodus of 500,000 from the Spanish republic), 1962 (a million from Algeria), and 1992 (700,000 Yugoslavs)? Most of the refugees from Syria, Iraq, Eritrea, Afghanistan, and Somalia never arrive in Europe, but remain in regions of conflict and border countries. For example, Lebanon has welcomed 1.5 million refugees to date, which amounts to 30% of its overall population. Global migration continues to be a significant factor which will have lasting influence on European demography and religiosity. This dynamic has become a first-order topic of missiological research.10 The missiological question implied by immigration is obvious: will it change the religious face of Europe? According to the 2016 Pew study, we can propose the probable hypothesis of a doubling of the Muslim population over the next several decades, amounting to 10%. A majority of refugees come from Muslim countries. Additionally, we must account for so-called ethnic churches stemming from non-refugee migration. Finally, there is also the question of conversions which might change the situation. We must not lose sight of the fact that concerning Muslims, statistics often use an ethnic and not a religious definition. This demands vigilance against hasty comparisons of the two religions. The second phenomenon of Christians coming from the Global South cannot be measured by statistics. As an example, I will cite one of the largest churches in Europe planted in London. The Kingsway International Christian Center (KICC), founded by Matthew Ashimolowo, a Nigerian missionary, attracts roughly 8,000 people to its gatherings each week.11 Thousands of missionaries from Africa, South America, and Asia have henceforth targeted Europe. Languages spoken by

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 343

25-09-2021 09:27:36

344

Afterword

groups from these two first locations are also practiced in Europe, which facilitates their task. Concerning conversions to Christianity, reliable figures are not yet available, but it seems clear that the change in context allows for greater probability of a change in religion. In Germany, baptized migrants are enriching existing parishes, but also forming new churches. Bianca Dümling observes that nearly one-quarter of the inhabitants of her country (18.6 million = 22.5%) have an immigrant background in 2018. Roughly half of these people declare themselves Christians. This obviously changes the ecclesial landscape, both statistically and spiritually.12 This figure must be placed in relation with the prospective study concerning members of the two major state churches in Germany in 2060. The projection estimates this number at 22.7 million persons. It is obvious that Christianity in Germany and in all of Europe will be increasingly influenced by men and women from the Global South, their Christian traditions, their spiritualities, and their theologies. Geopolitical Context In chapter 2 of my original monograph, when sketching the religious makeup of the habitants of the three states and one region, I said very little about the political context. The evolution of the internal political context of the EU and global geopolitical dynamics which also impregnate Europe merit several observations. The European Union has been profoundly impacted by the departure of the United Kingdom at the end of January 2020, a process begun in March 2017. One may henceforth speak of the twenty-seven nations of Europe, instead of twenty-eight.13 Concretely, this means that the number of British citizens no longer figure in EU statistics, and that this latter has “lost” 65.7 million persons. Accounting for its size, economic power, army, and transatlantic ties, the United Kingdom weighed heavily within the EU. Future ties with the EU have not yet ceased; negotiations are still very difficult. The British case is doubly symptomatic. The results of the vote to leave the EU were based on a close majority. The two camps can be divided into the losers of globalization, primarily situated in poor and de-industrialized regions, and the urban population. The famous “Brexit” has only fanned the flames of polarization between the two camps, weakening citizens’ adherence to their country’s democratic system. The United Kingdom reflects the weakened political situation of many other European countries. We are thinking of growing abstention from votes, of the shrinking voice of traditional parties and the emergence of atypical parties from outside the ordinary left-right ideological system, of the rise of parties on the extreme right, of the volatility of voters’ political opinions, and of popular trends in certain countries.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 344

25-09-2021 09:27:37

Afterword

345

Europe has also been weakened on the international scene. The United States is increasingly withdrawing from their historical Western allies and their role as a global power. They are abandoning multilateralism, settling into an isolationism which in any case is unprofitable for Europe. The geopolitical field is something like an economic competition between China and the United States. Democratic advances are endangered in some Western countries, which is a reminder that this political model perhaps is not eternally etched in stone.14 The mass mediatization of information on the one hand, and the possibilities of communication via social networks on the other, produce more and more information (texts and images) which are erroneous or manipulated. This continual instantaneous flow no longer allows for the necessary distance to verify this or that event. In this context of a society of endless information, should we add—in yet another “post” descriptor of our society, complementing the extant trio of postmodern, post-Christian, and post-secular—post-factual, in light of the half-truths, counter-truths, and other manipulations to which we are exposed? The weakening of the democratic model in a society used to progress ever since the Second World War is probably inscribed in the ideology (and now, probably, the postmodern fact) of the end of metanarratives. Christian churches thus are not the only ones submitted to secularization, but also ideologies, philosophies, and civil religions. For example, we are thinking here of democracy and its notion of citizenship. In this sense, a “secularization” is visible in the use of the right to vote and in political engagement. We will need to keep an eye on the evolution of political space in Europe; growing instability will certainly have repercussions on the religious landscape.15 The Ecological Imperative The ecological degradation of our planet as a scientific fact is lacking in my study. Over the last several years, millenarist “prophets” with their message of an “end of the world” have been replaced by very serious scientists announcing the inevitable extinction of life if human exploitation of the earth continues at its current rhythm. A whole body of literature examines “collapsology,” which describes the implosion of our industrialized societies.16 A missiology for the Western context clearly cannot address all problematics (in which case it would fall apart), but we should at least mention this major fact which is traditionally treated in theology under the theology of creation and social ethics. The current viral pandemic reinforces fears of a global “apocalypse,” an emblematic biblical term simply meaning revelation (naturally, the revelation of God), but also used today in popular association with a planetary catastrophe. A third imperative thus imposes itself within the already developed ethical imperative.17 It is clear that this threat to life is inscribed within the first

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 345

25-09-2021 09:27:37

346

Afterword

principal line of my contextualization model, and notably one of the resources mentioned, that of the book of Revelation (Fr. Apocalypse). The last book of the Bible is neither a manual of collapsology nor of Christian ecology, but primarily an unveiling of the glory of the Trinity in an eschatological perspective. The contemporary ecological imperative is manifest on the political and ideological level, oscillating between two approaches: the approach of techno-scientific mastery of life with a definition of life reduced to physiological phenomena on the one hand, and a re-enchantment of life under pressure from the imperative to act in favor of a world in peril and lacking in hope and meaning. The “collapsologists” have understood that the first approach does not compellingly provide ethical resources for the protection of humanity, whence a dissimulated return toward a new cosmology reminiscent of concepts from Antiquity and the Middle Ages (as well as a return toward the Bible, of course!). We are currently witnessing a displacement of the Enlightenment sacred, initially placed above life, toward “bare life,” properly speaking. Life itself becomes sacred and must be protected at any cost, which leads to an idolatry according to Olivier Rey.18 The revelation of God in the book of Revelation in particular and in biblical eschatological affirmations in general does not emphasize future catastrophes linked to evil, but the return of Jesus Christ in glory and the advent of a new world. This powerful message is an indispensable generator of hope for a society without horizon gripped by an idolatry of life. This society is incapable of providing the necessary moral means for an ethic as exacting as the rescue of our planet without recourse to a resource of hope from outside of “bare” biological life. Will this new idolatry be the indirect proof of an indispensable transcendent hope? It goes without saying that a project of missiology for the Western context must insert this imperative into its contextualization model, all while taking care to emphasize the heart of its missionary vocation, the call to conversion as the starting point of a new ethics. In another time and context, German Protestant missiology developed a missiology anchored in eschatology.19 According to the theological studies of Karl Hartenstein and Walter Freytag, the progress of the kingdom of God and mission were situated in time, and more precisely, in the “last times” between the Ascension and the Parousia. Two principal phenomena structure this time: the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the progress of the Gospel through mission. The challenges of yesterday and today are different, but the legitimacy of such an eschatological approach seems more pressing than ever. The Expansion of Virtual Space The growing role of virtual space in our lives as an alternate reality related to other spaces was only cursorily presented in my initial study.20 Since then

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 346

25-09-2021 09:27:37

Afterword

347

technology has progressed immensely and everyone from adolescents to the elderly is using smartphones and spending significant amounts of time on social media. In 2019, total media consumption was situated around eight hours per day on average globally, encompassing all media. The same year, time spent online surpassed time spent watching television. This trend owes to the success of smartphones which users use for more than two hours per day.21 The present pandemic has amplified this consumption of interaction via the internet, with direct consequences such as distance teaching, but also in church life which now happens in a decentralized way in the homes of believers. Current 4G and 5G technology allows for a colossal information exchange on a daily basis. This information is “dissipated” on the Web, often carelessly. It permits for our identification, tracking, and the creation of a rather specific consumer profile. This data constitutes an enormous economic goldmine which those acting online and in the market ably exploit, continually offering us products surprisingly well-adapted to our tastes. The present aesthetic imperative (which occupies a major place in my study) incites us to create a singular and attractive identity which we present in virtual space, in hopes of garnering comments and positive symbols. The human cannot create her identity autonomously (which is a postulate of modernity); she always depends on the recognition of the other. This search for the legitimacy of one’s life is multiplied in the expanse of virtual space.22 This means that many persons expose themselves by seeking identity and love online without taking precautions. Enormous risks in the protection of intimate data are taken because the need for recognition is stronger than the need to preserve one’s private life. Bernard Harcourt speaks of this phenomenon in terms of a “society of exposure.”23 His research interests are focused on consumers of platforms. It suggests that we exhibit an insatiable desire to exist online, which we act on through exposure on the internet to obtain a validation of ourselves. A scintillating parallel life arises through the virtual mirage alongside of an existence which seems somewhat banal, impoverished and dreary, in which subjects must confront the risks of “real” life. The expansion of virtual space strongly resembles a new industrial revolution, with consequences on every level of human life, as well as for missiology and ecclesiology. Virtual space ought to be quickly occupied as this space takes a central importance in our lives. It figures among the priorities of a critical missiology for the Western context. NOTES 1. In Germany in 2018, around 200,000 members abandoned the Catholic Church, and the state Protestant churches fared similarly. Cf. “200,000 catholiques

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 347

25-09-2021 09:27:37

348

Afterword

allemands ont quitté l’Église en 2018,” https​:/​/ww​​w​.vat​​icann​​ews​.v​​a​/fr/​​eglis​​e​/new​​ s​/201​​9​-07/​​eglis​​e​-cat​​holiq​​ue​-al​​lemag​​ne​-​ba​​isse-​​fidel​​es​.ht​​ml, consulted August 11, 2020. A prospective study at the University of Fribourg in Brisgau predicts that both Christian confessions combined will lose around half their members by 2060, moving from 40 million to 22.7 million people. Cf. David Gutmann and Fabian Peters, “German Churches in Times of Demographic Change and Declining Affiliation: A Projection to 2060,” Comparative Population Studies 45 (2020) 3–34. 2. The public outcry at this incident reminds us of the notion of vicarious religion developed by Grace Davie for the English context. 3. See the statistics and blog of sociologist of religion Sébastien Fath, who specializes in the evangelical movement: Sébastien Fath, “Statistiques évangéliques globales 2020 (incluant les pentecôtistes) environ 660 millions dans le monde,” http:​/​ /blo​​gdese​​basti​​enfat​​h​.hau​​tetfo​​rt​.co​​m​/med​​ia​/00​​/00​/2​​​88952​​9227.​​pdf, consulted August 22, 2020. 4. “Being Christian in Western Europe,” Pew Research Center, 29 May 2018, https​:/​/ww​​w​.pew​​forum​​.org/​​2018/​​05​/29​​/bein​​g​-chr​​istia​​n​-in-​​w​este​​rn​-eu​​rope/​ (consulted Aug. 11 2020). 5. Ibid, 9. 6. Taylor Charles, L’Âge séculier, 2011; Cf. Taussig Sylvie (dir.), Charles Taylor. Religion et sécularisation (Paris: CNRS, 2014). 7. Cf. our discussion of Islam in chapter 3. See also Michael Lipka, “Europe’s Muslim Population will Continue to Grow—But how much Depends on Migration,” Pew Research Center, 4 December 2016, https​:/​/ww​​w​.pew​​resea​​rch​.o​​rg​/fa​​ct​-ta​​nk​/20​​ 17​/12​​/04​/e​​urope​​s​-mus​​lim​-p​​opula​​tion-​​will-​​conti​​nue​-t​​o​-gro​​w​-but​​-how​-​​much-​​depen​​ds​ -on​​-migr​​ation​/ (accessed August 12, 2020). 8. Regarding France, cf. Bernard Rougier, Les territoires conquis de l’islamisme (Paris: PUF, 2020); Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot, Quatar Papers: Comment l’émirat finance l’islam de France et de l’Europe (Neuilly-sur-Seine: Michel Lafon, 2019. The well-known novel by Michel Houellebecq, Soumission (Paris: Flammarion, 2015) appeared the same day as the Islamicist attack against the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The novel describes a banal yet rampant Islamification of France. 9. Cf. chapter 3, sec. “Demography and Migration.” For what follows in the present section, see the official site of the EU, Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union, https://ec​.europa​.eu​/eurostat, and particularly Agnès Faure, “Les migrations en Europe: Carte et comparatif, Eurostat, 25.03.2020,” https​:/​/ww​​w​.tou​​ teleu​​rope.​​eu​/ac​​tuali​​te​/le​​s​-mig​​ratio​​ns​-e​n​​-euro​​pe​.ht​​ml (accessed August 12, 2020). 10. On the diaspora from South Asia, cf. Sam George, Diaspora Christianities: Global Scattering and Gathering of South Asian Christians (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2019). 11. Timothy C. Tennent speaks of 12,000 persons, while the church’s website mentions 8,000: Timothy Tennent, Invitation to World Missions: A Trinitarian Missiology for the Twenty-first Century, Invitation to Theological Studies Series (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2010), 319; Kingsway International Christian Center: https:// www​.kicc​.org​.uk​/press​-area/ (accessed August 13, 2020).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 348

25-09-2021 09:27:38

Afterword

349

12. Bianca Dümling, “Migration verändert die kirchliche Landschaft in Deutschland. Entwicklung und Geschichte der Migrationskirchen.” In Claudia Rammelt et al., eds., Begegnung in der Glokalität. Christliche Migrationskirchen in Deutschland im Wandel (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2018), 77–90. We do not have reliable figures concerning conversions of Muslim immigrants to Christianity in Germany. 13. Aurélien Antoine, “Le Brexit, suite et fin?” Esprit, March 2020; Fabrice Demarigny, “Après le Brexit, quelle union pour l'Europe?” Esprit, February 2017. 14. On the connection between Christianity and democracy and the assimilation of Christianity and democracy, see chapter VI in Jean-Louis Vieillard-Baron, La religion et la cité (Paris: Félin, 2010), 171–198. 15. Cf. the section on the “Necessity of Transcendance” in chapter 3. 16. Pablo Servigne and Raphaël Stevens, Comment tout peut s'effondrer: Petit manuel de collapsologie à l'usage des générations présentes (Paris: Seuil, 2015). 17. Cf. chapter 3, “The domination of Aesthetics and Ethics” and the two principal areas of my contextual model on “An Aesthetic Missiology” and “An Ethical Missiology” in chapter 5. 18. Olivier Rey, L’idolâtrie de la vie (Paris: Gallimard, 2020). 19. We are referring to missiologists Karl Hartenstein and Walter Freytag: cf. Henning Wrogemann, Theologies of Mission, Intercultural Theology, vol. 2 (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2018), 47–58. 20. Cf., chapter 2, “Virtual Space.” 21. “Consumers will spend 800 hours using mobile internet devices this year,” https​:/​/ww​​w​.zen​​ithme​​dia​.c​​om​/co​​nsume​​rs​-wi​​ll​-sp​​end​-8​​00​-ho​​urs​-u​​sing-​​mobil​​e​-int​​ern​ et​​-devi​​ces​-t​​his​-y​​ear/ (accessed August 14, 2020). 22. Cf. ibid, 288–292. 23. Bernard E. Harcourt, Exposed: Desire and Disobedience in the Digital Age (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 349

25-09-2021 09:27:38

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 350

25-09-2021 09:27:38

Postface

After reading Jean-Georges Gantenbein’s book, we cannot help expressing our thankfulness at the observation that missiology—which is a sort of Cinderella discipline: the most beautiful, most unexpected latecomer in theology, according to the formula of theologian Gustav Warneck (1834–1910)— is today a pertinent discipline for envisaging mission in Europe. As most missiological studies to date have examined external mission, a study like this which theorizes internal mission is more than welcome. But in a time of globalized exchanges, we must not forget the filiations between mission in Europe and mission outside of Europe. Contextualization, a key concept in this book, was thus forged and popularized in the 1970s by and for theologians of the third world. It is fortunate that it is experiencing a comeback today in “old Europe,” which needs it so badly. This undertaking is thus courageous and its result impressive, for Gantenbein has managed to hold together a maximum of parameters which must be taken into account in the European context. Having said this, Gantenbein has taken a risk by suggesting that Western theologians hardly practiced missiology or contextualized the Gospel before Newbigin, Bosch, and Walldorf, or that they did so more or less consciously. Indeed, strong indications of the Gospel’s retreat from Christendom have existed in the history of Western Christianity, notably at moments of the Reformations and awakenings which have sprung up throughout its history. At these moments, hope for a mission of evangelization for Europe has resurged. But it is true that at the end of these episodes, Christendom generally reconstituted itself—often, unfortunately, through violence—pushing off the necessity of a renewal of mission in Europe until a later time. Today, Christendom will no longer reconstitute itself, and it is even in the distance from the Gospel established through secularization that the new 351

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 351

25-09-2021 09:27:38

352

Postface

work of the Gospel will unfold—not in order to fill this gap, but to awaken thirst for the Gospel among our contemporaries who are called to spread and contextualize it in society. The question of the church will be posed afresh, of what form will be taken by communities who will once again take hold of the Gospel in Europe, following the beautiful image of the church as a “missionary space par excellence.” It is here that the conceptual tools offered by Gantenbein should be concretely applied. Aimed at a Francophone public, it would be useful for the concepts in this book, developed in other European and non-European linguistic fields, to find footholds within the French-speaking world. To this end, allow me to express two hopes. The first concerns the rehabilitation of Jacques Ellul, one of the great French Protestant thinkers of the twentieth century, whom Gantenbein cites several times but who could be ranked alongside Bosch, Newbigin, and Walldorf. Without missiological language, Ellul’s entire oeuvre was interested in contextualizing the Gospel with the help of his notion of the correspondence between the revealed theological fact and the given social fact. This notion adequately expresses the tension between the couple of continuity/discontinuity in Gantenbein’s “critical contextualization of relative discontinuity.” Correspondence expresses the whole correlational play of questions and responses which arise from the encounter of the social context and the biblical text, whether in terms of approval or refusal, of rapprochement or distancing, of frustration and displacement of the question. The second hope concerns the place of missiology in the organum of theology within Francophone space, which, despite incontestable advances since the last third of the twentieth century, still ought to be strengthened. In the academic context, missiology can claim neither hegemony nor independence. Its dependence on the four classic theological disciplines—biblical, historical, systematic, and practical—is obvious. Nevertheless, it is as yet unknown whether it should constitute a fifth discipline, or if it should influence the others. On this subject, missiologist Marc Spindler helpfully distinguishes “anonymous missiology” and “responsible missiology.” The first includes real attempts at contextualization which are not theorized as such and are often unconscious throughout history. The second openly declares its name, but from within each of the theological disciplines: whence a biblical, historical, systematic, and practical missiology. Moreover, Spindler lays the foundations of a responsible missiology which would take up a “prescriptive” posture, taking the imperative of mission and evangelization head-on, in opposition to a merely “descriptive” posture which retreats before this sort of imperative. It is probably this militant and spiritual aspect of mission which has hindered its full entry into the rather muted space represented by certain theology faculties, though this poses less of a problem in others.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 352

25-09-2021 09:27:39

Postface

353

As Gantenbein’s book forcefully demonstrates, mission in Europe cannot neglect a conceptualization which learns from the experiences of those who have thought missiology before us and within the framework of theological workshops in working order. Jean-François Zorn Jean-François Zorn is professor emeritus of the History of Christianity at the Institut Protestant de Théologie, Faculté de Montpellier. He is an associate researcher at the Centre de recherches interdisciplinaires en sciences humaines et sociales at the Université Paul-Valéry in Montpellier. He is president of the Protestant missiology journal Perspectives Missionaires. He is vice president of the Centre de Recherche et d’Echanges sur la Diffusion et l’Inculturation du Christianisme (CREDIC) and secretary of the Association Francophone Oeucuménique de Missiologie (AFOM).

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 353

25-09-2021 09:27:39

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 354

25-09-2021 09:27:39

Bibliography

“Actes de la 3e conférence européenne de missiologie, Paris, 24–28 août 2006.” Perspectives missionnaires no. 52 (2006). “Ad Gentes 40 ans après.” Spiritus, hors série 1, 2005. Adler, Gilbert. “La théologie pastorale dans la théologie catholique de l’après guerre à Vatican II.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 27–38. Ådna, Jostein and Kvalbein, Hans. The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles. Coll. WUNT no. 127; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. Ahrens, Theodor. Gegebenheiten: Missionswissenschaftliche Studien. Frankfurt: Otto Lembeck, 2005. Alberich, Emilio. “Inculturer et indigéniser le christianisme.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques, 2nd expanded ed. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2007, 453–465. Althaus, Paul. Die christliche Wahrheit: Lehrbuch der Dogmatik, vol. 1, 2nd ed. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1949. Andries, Chloé. “L’Église à la carte.” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January– February 2007) 34–37. Arendt, Hannah. Condition de l’homme moderne. Coll. Sciences Humaines—Agora, 1st ed. 1958. Paris: Pocket, 1994. Translated into English as The Human Condition. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. Arènes, Jacques et al., dir. Réinventer la culpabilité. Paris: Buchet-Chastel, 2009. Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendländischen Literatur. Bern: Francke, 1946. Auneau, Joseph. “Sainteté A. Théologie biblique.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, Jean-Yves Lacoste, dir., 1st ed. “Quadrige;” Paris: PUF, 2002, 1058. Badiou, Alain. Saint Paul: La fondation de l’universalisme. Paris: PUF, 1997. Balz, Horst and Schrage, Wolfgang. Die “Katholischen” Briefe: Die Briefe des Jakobus. Barbier-Bouvet, Jean-François. “Sondage exclusif: les catholiques à la loupe.” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 22–28. 355

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 355

25-09-2021 09:27:39

356

Bibliography

Barrett, David B. et al. World Christian Encyclopedia, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Barth, Karl. Die kirchliche Dogmatik, 2nd ed. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1993. Basset, Jean-Claude. Le dialogue interreligieux: Chance ou déchéance de la foi. Coll. Cogitatio Fidei no. 197. Paris/ Cerf, 1996. Basset, Jean-Claude and Gisel, Pierre. “Religion et religions.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded edition. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1292–1318. Bastian, Jean-Pierre. “Pour une redéfinition du concept de minorité religieuse dans l’Europe contemporaine.” In Minorités religieuses dans l’espace européen. Approches sociologiques et juridiques, dir. Jean-Pierre Bastian and Francis Messner. Paris: PUF, 2007, 63–73. ———. “Sociologie des missions.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie: Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/ CLÉ, 2001, 324–327. ———. “Les religions dans l’espace européen.” In L’Europe à la recherche de son âme: Les Églises entre l’Europe et la Nation, dir. Jean-Pierre Bastian et al. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1999, 15–27. ———. “La foi en situation: Considérations sociologiques sur les croyances et les pratiques religieuses contemporaines.” In Introduction à la théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf. Strasbourg: PUS, 1997, 60–70. Baubérot, Jean. Histoire de la laïcité en France. Coll. Que sais-je? Paris: PUF, 2000. ———. With Leuba, Jean-Louis. “Oecuménisme.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1085–1104. ———. “Pluralisme.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1158. ———. Le protestantisme doit-il mourir? Paris: Seuil, 1988. ———. With Willaime, Jean-Paul. “Le courant évangélique français: un ‘intégrisme Protestant’?” Social Compass XXXII no. 4 (1985) 393–411. ———. Le retour des Huguenots. La vitalité protestante, xixe-xxe siècle. Paris/ Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 1985. Bauckham, Richard. La théologie de l’Apocalypse. Coll. Théologies. Paris: Cerf, 2006. ———. Bible and Mission: Christian Witness in a Postmodern World. Carlisle/ Grand Rapids: Paternoster/Baker, 2001. ———. The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993. Bauer, Walter. “archê.” Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 6th expanded ed. Berlin: Walter de Grutyer, 1988, 225. ———. “exousia.” Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 6th expanded ed. Berlin: Walter de Grutyer, 1988, 564. ———. “kalos.” Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 6th expanded ed. Berlin: Walter de Grutyer, 1988, 812–813. ———. “sôzô.” Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 6th expanded ed. Berlin: Walter de Grutyer, 1988, 1591–1593.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 356

25-09-2021 09:27:40

Bibliography

357

Baumann, Andreas. Der Islam, Gottes Ruf zur Umkehr? Eine vernachlässigte Deutung aus christlicher Sicht. Basel: Brunnen, 2003. Bayer, Oswald. Martin Luthers Theologie: Eine Vergegenwärtigung, 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. ———. Theologie. Coll. HST no. 1. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1994. ———. Promissio. Geschichte der reformatorischen Wende in Luthers Theologie, 2nd ed. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1989. Bazin, Jean-Nicolas and Cottin, Jérôme. Vers un christianisme virtuel? Enjeux et défis de l’Internet. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2003. Bechmann, Ulrike. “Abraham und Ibrāhīm: Die Grenzen des Abraham-Paradigmas im interreligiösen Dialog.” Münchener theologische Zeitschrift 58 no. 2 (2007) 110–126. ———. “Abraham, Beschwörungsformel oder Präzisierungsquelle? Bibeltheologische und religionswissenschaft liche Untersuchungen zum AbrahamParadigma im interreligiösen Dialog.” Habilitation defended at the University of Bayreuth, 2004. Becker, Jürgen and Duquoc, Christian. “Résurrection du Christ.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, Jean-Yves Lacoste, dir., 1st ed. “Quadrige;” Paris: PUF, 2002, 1008–1013. Belting, Hans, La Vraie Image: Croire aux images? Paris: Gallimard, 2007. Berger, Peter L. L’impératif hérétique: Les possibilités actuelles du discours religieux. Paris: Van Dieren, 2005. ———. With Luckmann, Thomas. La construction sociale de la réalité. Paris: Méridiens/Klincksieck, 1986. Bettscheider, Heribert, dir. Mission in Europa: Überlegungen zu einem aktuellen Thema. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag, 2005. Bevans, Stephen B. Models of Contextual Theology. Revised and expanded ed. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1992 , 2002. Beyerhaus, Peter. Die Bibel in der Mission: Ersandte sein Wort. Theologie der christlichen Mission, vol. 1. Coll. TVG, Wuppertal/Bad Liebenzell: Brockhaus/ Liebenzeller Mission, 1996. ———. “Theologisches Verstehen nichtchristlicher Religionen.” Kerygma und Dogma 35 no. 2 (1989) 106–127. Birmelé, André. “Église.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme. Pierre Gisel, dir. 2nd revised and expaned ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 483–499. Blaser, Klauspeter, and Geense, Adriaan. “Inculturation.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme. Pierre Gisel, dir. 2nd revised and expaned ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 720–721. ———. Le Christianisme social. Une approche théologique et historique. Coll. Débats, Paris: Van Dieren, 2003. ———. “Missiologie.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 213–216. ———. La Théologie au xxe siècle. Lausanne: L’Âge d’Homme, 1995. ———. “Mission.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme. Pierre Gisel, dir. 2nd revised and expaned ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 977–992.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 357

25-09-2021 09:27:40

358

Bibliography

Bliese, Richard. “Mission in North America.” In Leitfaden ökumenischer Missionstheologie, dir. Christoph Dahling-Sander et al. Gütersloh: Kaiser/ Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2003, 519–531. Blough, Neal. “Pluralisme et vérité: L’Église peut-elle encore être missionnaire en Occident?” Perspectives Missionnaires no. 39 (2000–2001) 5–17. Bobzien, Harmut. “Martin Luthers Beitrag zur Kenntnis und Kritik des Islam.” Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 27 no. 3 (1985) 262–289. Bockmühl, Markus et al. “Wort Gottes.” Evangelisches Lexikon für Theologie und Gemeinde, vol. 3, dir. Helmut Burkhardt and Uwe Swarat. Wuppertal/Zurich: Brockhaus, 1994, 2186–2188. Boespflug, François, “Religions missionnaires, religions non missionnaires.” Revue des sciences religieuses 80 no. 2 (April 2006) 127–154. Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Résistance et soumission: Lettres et notes de captivité. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2006. Bons, Eberhard, dir. “‘Car c’est l’amour qui me plait, non le sacrifice…’ Recherches sur Osée 6.6 et son interprétation juive et chrétienne.” Journal for the Study of Judaism, supplement no. 88. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2004. Bosch, David J. Dynamique de la mission chrétienne: Histoire et avenir des modèles missionnaires. Lomé/Genève/Paris: Haho/Labor et Fides/Karthala, 1995. ———. “Croire en l’avenir: Vers une missiologie de la culture occidentale.” Lettre interéglises du Centre de Recherche Théologique Missionnaire 2 no. 69–70 (1995–2) 1–49. ———. “Evangelisation, Evangelisierung.” Lexikon missionstheologischer Grundbegriffe, dir. Karl Müller. Berlin: Reimer, 1987, 102–105. Bouvier, Alban and Steiner, Philippe. La théorie du choix rationnel: Les Foundations of Social Theory de James S. Coleman en débat. Revue française de sociologie, April–June 2003. Bovon, François. L’Évangile selon Saint Luc 1,1–9,50. Coll. CNT[N] no. IIIa. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1991. ———. Luc le théologien: Vingt-cinq ans de recherches (1950–1975). Coll. Le Monde de la Bible. Neuchâtel/Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1978. Boy, Daniel. “Les Français et les parasciences: vingt ans de mesure.” Revue française de sociologie 43 no. 1 (January–March 2002) 35–45. Braque, Rémi. Du Dieu des chrétiens et d’un ou deux autres. Paris: Flammarion, 2008. ———. “Saint-Augustin.” Le Monde, 4 avril 2008, 8. Bréchon, Pierre. “Les recompositions flottantes du croire.” Esprit n° 333 (March– April 2007) 136–145. Bruce, Steve. “The Demise of Christianity in Britain.” In Predicting Religion. Christian, Secular and Alternative Futures, dir. Grace Davie et al. Alershot: Ashgate, 2003, 53–63. Büker, Markus. “Europa, ohne Grenzen und ohne Mission? Zur Notwendigkeit und Chance inkulturierter Mission im deutschsprachigen Raum.” Zeitschrift für Mission 26 no. 2–3 (2000) 194–209.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 358

25-09-2021 09:27:40

Bibliography

359

Bultmann, Rudolf. “ginôskô, gnôsis, epiginôskô, epignôsis.” Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, dir. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1990, 688–710. Bünker, Arnd. “Die katholische Kirche in Europa auf der Suche nach ihrer missionarischen Identität.” Europa. Christen, Kirchen und Missionen, coll. JbM 2006. Hamburg: Missionshilfe, 2006, 31–42. ———. Missionarisch Kirche sein? Eine missionswissenschaftliche Analyse von Konzepten zur Sendung der Kirche in Deutschland. Münster: LIT, 2004. Burkhardt, Helmut. “Rechtfertigung und Heiligung, eine biblisch-dogmatische Verhältnisbestimmung.” Jahrbuch für evangelikale Theologie 20. Witten: SCM Brockhaus, 2006, 25–46. ———. Das gute Handeln (Materialethik): Erster Teil. Ethik, vol. 2. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 2003. ———. Christ werden. Bekehrung und Wiedergeburt, Anfang des christlichen Lebens. Coll. TVG “Orientierung.” Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1999. ———. Einführung in die Ethik. Grund und Norm sittlichen Handelns (Fundamentalethik), vol. 1. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1996. ———. Ein Gott in allen Religionen? Wiederkehr der Religiosität, Chance und Gefahr, coll. TVG “Orientierung,” 2nd expanded ed. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1993. Caillé, Alain. “Présentation.” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 5–30. Campbell, Gordon. L’Apocalypse de Jean: Une lecture thématique. Coll. Théologie biblique. Cléon d’Andran: Excelsis, 2007. Campiche, Roland. et al. Les deux visages de la religion. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004. ———. et al, Croire en Suisse(s). Lausanne: L’Âge d’Homme, 1992. Carbonnier-Burkard, Marianne and Cabanel, Patrick. Une histoire des protestants en France. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1998. Casanova, José. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994. Causse, Jean-Daniel. “La cure psychanalytique: un salut profane?” Études théologiques et religieuses 83 no. 3 (2008) 377–387. ———. “Individualisation et singularization: Approche anthropologique et théologique.” Appel à témoins: Mutations sociales et avenir de la mission chrétienne, coll. Théologie de la mission, dir. Geneviève Comeau and Jean-François Zorn. Paris: Cerf, 2004, 45–59. Chalier, Catherine. Le désir de conversion. Paris: Seuil, 2011. Champion, Françoise. “L’univers mystique-ésotérique et croyances parallèles.” Futuribles n° 260 (January 2001) 49–59. Chanson, Philippe. “Inculturation.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/ CLÉ, 2001, 165–170. Chenu, Bruno. “Théologies contextuelles.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 340–343. ———. Théologies chrétiennes des tiers mondes. Paris: Centurion, 1987.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 359

25-09-2021 09:27:41

360

Bibliography

Cholvy, Gérard and Hilaire, Yves-Marie. Le fait religieux aujourd’hui en France: Les trente dernières années (1974–2004). coll. Petits Cerf-Histoire. Paris: Cerf, 2004. ———, dirs. La France religieuse: Reconstruction et crises (1945–1975), Toulouse: Privat, 2002. ———, dirs. Histoire religieuse de la France: Géographie xixe–xxe siècle. Toulouse: Privat, 2000. ———. Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine, vol. iii. Toulouse: Privat, 1930/1988. Civardi, Christian. “L’Église d’Écosse et la société depuis 1945.” In Religion et politique en Grande-Bretagne. Monica Charlot, dir. Paris: Presses de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, 1994, 23–38. Clément, Olivier. L’Église orthodoxe. 7th ed. Paris: PUF, 2002. Collet, Giancarlo. “Ein noch nicht ganz ausgeträumter Traum? Missionstheologische Anmerkungen zur Neuevangelisierung Europas.” In “Bis an die Grenzen der Erde.” Grundfragen heutiger Missionswissenschaft. Fribourg: Herder, 2002, 246–263. Comby, Jean. “Evangélisation.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 125–129. Conférence des Evêques de France. Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle. Coll. Documents des Églises vol. 1. Paris: Cerf, 1994. ———. Vers une nouvelle étape. Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle. Coll. Documents des Églises vol. 2. Paris: Cerf, 1995. ———. Lettre aux catholiques de France. Proposer la foi dans la société actuelle. Coll. Documents des Églises vol. 3. Paris: Cerf, 1996. Conovici, Iuliana. “The Romanian Orthodox Church after 1989. Social Identity, National Memory, and the Theory of Secularization.” In Church and Religious Life in Post-Communist Societies, dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 7. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2007, 173–182. Cottin, Jérôme. Le regard et la Parole: Une théologie protestante de l’image. Coll. Lieux théologiques no. 25. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994. Coutard, Jérôme. “Entretien, focus group et analyse de contenu.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques, Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 99–104. Coyault, Bernard. “Les Églises issues de l’immigration dans le paysage protestant français. De la “mission en retour” à la mission commune?” Perspectives missionnaires no. 48 (2004–2), 5–21. Cullmann, Oscar. “Eschatologie und Mission im Neuen Testament.” In Oscar Cullmann: Vorträge und Aufsätze 1925–1962, dir. Karlfried Fröhlich. Tübingen/ Zurich: Mohr (Siebeck)/Zwingli, 1966, 348–360. Das Evangelium unter die Leute bringen. Zum missionarischen Dienst der Kirche in unserem Land. coll. EKD-Texte no. 68. Hanover: EKD, 2001. Davie, Grace. The Sociology of Religion. London, SAGE, 2007. ———. “Is Europe an Exceptional Case?” The Hedgehog Review (Spring/Summer 2006) 23–34.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 360

25-09-2021 09:27:41

Bibliography

361

———. Europe: The Exceptional Case: Parameters of Faith in the Modern World. London, DLT, 2002. ———. Religion in Modern Europe: A Memory Mutates. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000. ———. “Croire sans appartenir: le cas britannique.” In Identités religieuses en Europe, coll. “Recherches,” dir. Grace Davie and Danièle Hervieu-Léger. Paris: La Découverte, 1996, 175–194. ———. La religion des Britanniques: De 1945 à nos jours. Coll. Histoire et société no. 34. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1996. Delestre, Antoine. La religion des étudiants. Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997. Delpard, Raphaël. La persécution des chrétiens aujourd’hui dans le monde. Neuillysur-Seine, Michel Lafond, 2009. Delumeau, Jean. Le christianisme va-t-il mourir? Paris: Hachette, 1977. ———. Le Catholicisme entre Luther et Voltaire. Paris: PUF, 1971. Denèfle, Sylvette. Sociologie de la sécularisation: Être sans religion en France à la fin du xxe siècle. Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997. Deneken, Michel. “La mission comme nouvelle évangélisation.” Revue des sciences religieuses 80 no. 2 (April 2006) 217–231. Desroche, Henry. “Déchristianisation.” Dictionnaire de l’Histoire du christianisme. Paris: Michel, 2000, 347–354. Dewitte, Jacques. “Croire ce que l’on croit: Réflexions sur la religion et les sciences sociales.” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 62–89. Dickson, John P. Mission-Commitment in Ancient Judaism and in the Pauline Communities: The Shape, Extent and Background of Early Christian Mission. Coll. WUNT II no. 159. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. Dinter, Astrid et al. Einführung in die Empirische Theologie: Gelebte Religion erforschen. Coll. UTB no. 2888. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007. Donegani, Jean-Marie. “Les récits de vie.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier & Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 105–117. Donzé, Marc. “La théologie pratique entre corrélation et prophétie.” In Pratique et théologie, dir. Pierre Gisel, coll. Pratiques no. 1. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1989, 183–190. Douillet, Cyril and Khoury, Yasmina. “L’Église de France en chiffres.” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 42–43. Dumas, Marc. “Corrélation–Tillich et Schillebeeckx.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/ Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 71–83. Dumézil, Bruno. Les racines chrétiennes de l’Europe: Conversion et liberté dans les royaumes barbares ve–viiie siècle. Paris: Fayard, 2005. Durkheim, Émile. Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Coll. Quadrige, 4th ed. Paris: PUF, 1998 (1st ed. 1912). Ebeling, Gerhard. Einführung in die theologische Sprachlehre. Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1971.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 361

25-09-2021 09:27:42

362

Bibliography

———. “Diskussionsthesen für eine Vorlesung zur Einführung in das Studium der Theologie.” Wort und Glaube, vol. 1. Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1960, 447–457. Eber, Jochen. “Kirche als Institution oder Ereignis?” Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche. Gemeindeaufb au auf der Basis einer biblisch erneuerten Ekklesiologie, dir. Helge Stadelmann, coll. TVG. Giessen/Basel/Wuppertal: Brunnen/Brockhaus, 1998, 195–219. Ellul, Jacques. Ce que je crois. Paris: Grasset, 1987. ———. La subversion du christianisme. Coll. Empreintes. Paris: Seuil, 1984. ———. La parole humiliée. Paris: Seuil, 1981. ———. L’apocalypse: architecture en movement. Coll. L’athéisme interroge. Paris: Desclée, 1975. ———. Éthique de la liberté, vol. 1. Coll. Nouvelle série théologique no. 27. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1973. ———. Fausse présence au monde moderne. Coll. Tribune libre protestante. Paris: Les Bergers et les Mages, 1964. ———. “Présence au monde moderne.” Le défi et le nouveau. Oeuvres théologiques. Paris: La Table Ronde, 2007, 19–116. Engel, Pascal and Rorty, Richard. A quoi bon la vérité? Coll. Nouveau Collège de Philosophie, Paris: Grasset, 2005. Eslin, Jean-Claude. “Pascal peut-il être pour nous une voie vers Dieu?” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 266–278. Europa. Christen, Kirchen und Missionen. Coll. JbM 2006. Hamburg: Missionshilfe, 2006. Evrard, Patrick. “Esthétique.” Encylopédie du protestantisme, 521–527. Fabry, Heinz-Josef et al. “qâhal.” Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, vol. VI, dir. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1973–1995, 1204–1222. Fath, Sébastien. Du ghetto au reseau: Le protestantisme évangélique en France (1800–2005). Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2005. Fath, Sébastien. “Christianisation et déchristianisation.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 46–50. Feldmeier, Reinhard. Die Christen als Fremde: Die Metapher der Fremde in der antiken Welt, im Urchristentum und im 1. Petrusbrief. Coll. WUNT no. 64. Tübingen: Mohr, 1992. Ferry, Luc. L’homme-Dieu ou le Sens de la vie. Paris: Grasset, 1996. Fiedler, Klaus. “Wo sind die 20.000? Eine kritische Analyse von Lawrence Keyes’ Konzept der ‘transkulturellen Drittweltmissionare’ und der ihm zugrundeliegenden Daten.” Evangelikale Missiologie 5 no. 3 (1989) 37–40. Filoramo, Giovanni. Qu’est-ce que la religion? Thèmes, méthodes, problèmes. Paris: Cerf, 2007. Flemming, Dean. Contextualization in the New Testament: Patterns for Theology and Mission. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 362

25-09-2021 09:27:42

Bibliography

363

Foster, Paul. Community, Law and Mission in Matthew’s Gospel. Coll. WUNT II no. 177. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004. Fouilloux, Étienne. “Fille aînée de l’Église ou pays de mission? (1926–1958).” In Société sécularisée et renouveaux religieux (xxe siècle), dir. Étienne Fouilloux et al. Histoire de la France religieuse vol. IV. Paris: Seuil, 1992, 129–252. ———. “Traditions et expériences françaises.” In Guerres mondiales et totalitarismes (1914–1958), Histoire du christianisme des origines à nos jours, vol. XII, dir. Jean-Marie Mayeur et al. Paris: Desclée/Fayard, 1990, 451–522. Frégosi, Franck. Penser l’islam dans la laïcité. Les musulmans de France et la République. Paris: Fayard, 2008. Freytag, Walter. Reden und Aufsätze. dir. J. Hermelink and Hans-Jochen Margull, vol. 1. Munich: Kaiser, 1961. Fridlund, Patrik. “Mobile Performances. A Philosophical Account of Linguistic Undecidability as Possibility and Problem in the Theology of Religion.” Thesis defended at the University of Lund, 2007. Friesen, Steven J. Imperial Cults and the Revelation of John: Reading Revelation in the Ruins. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Gabizon, Cecilia. “Enquête sur le financement des nouvelles mosques.” Le Figaro​ .fr​, 22 December 2008, 1–3. www​.lefi garo.​​fr​/ac​​tuali​​te​-fr​​ance/​​2008/​​12​/13​​/0101​​ 6​-200​​81213​​ARTFI​​G0074​​5​-enq​​uete-​​sur​-l​​e​-fin​​ancem​​ent​-d​​es​​-no​​uvell​​es​-mo​​squee​​s ​ .php​(accessed February 25, 2010). Gadille, Jacques. “Adaptation.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 15–19. Gagnebin, Laurent. “La norme de la Bible en théologie pratique.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 191–201. ———. “Comment se fait la théologie pratique?” In La Théologie pratique: Statut, méthodes, perspectives d’avenir, Textes du Congrès international oecuménique et francophone de théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Reymond and Jean-Michel Sordet, coll. Le Point Théologique no. 57. Paris: Beauchesne, 1993, 33–41. Gambarotto, Laurent. “Wichern, Johann Hinrich (1808–1881).” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1665–166. Gantenbein, Hansjörg [Jean-Georges]. “‘La France, pays de mission?’: la définition de la mission et les critères d’une missiologie de la culture occidentale.” Masters’ thesis at the Faculté de Théologie Protestante de l’Université Marc Bloch, Strasbourg, 2006. ———. “Mission en Europe. Une étude socio-missiologique pour le 21e siècle.” Doctoral thesis at the Faculté de Théologie Protestante de l’Université de Strasbourg, 2010. Gauchet, Marcel. “La notion de religion est indépassable.” Le Figaro littéraire, 16 February 2006.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 363

25-09-2021 09:27:43

364

Bibliography

———. Désenchantement du monde: Une histoire politique de la religion. Coll. Bibliothèque des sciences humaines. Paris: Gallimard, 1985. Gehring, Roger W. Hausgemeinde und Mission: Die Bedeutung antiker Häuser und Hausgemeinschaft en, von Jesus bis Paulus. Coll. TVG Bibelwissenschaft liche Monographien no. 9. Giessen: Brunnen, 2000. Gibellini, Rosino, Panorama de la théologie au xxe siècle. Expanded and revised ed. Paris: Cerf, 2004. Gillet, Alex. “Vers une missiologie de la culture occidentale.” Église et Mission no. 271 (September 1993) 37–44. Gillet, Olivier. Religion et nationalism: L’idéologie de l’Église orthodoxe roumaine sous le régime communiste. Coll. Spiritualités et pensées libres. Brussels: Université de Bruxelles, 1997. Girard, René. Les origines de la culture. Coll. Philosophie. Paris: Hachette, 2004. ———. Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde. Paris: Grasset, 1978. Girondin, Jean-Claude. “Evangélisation (Théologie et déontologie).” Dictionnaire de théologie pratique, dir. Christophe Paya. Charols: Excelsis, 2011, 332–344. Gitton, Michel. “Hellénisation du christianisme.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 524–526. Godin, Henri and Daniel, Yvan. La France, pays de mission? Paris: L’Abeille, 1943. Gog, Sorin, “Patterns of religiosity in Romanian society.” In Eastern European Religion, dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 5. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2006, 183–201. Gossin, Richard, ed. Église​.co​m. L’Église face aux nouvelles technologies de communication. coll. Travaux de la Faculté de Théologie Protestante de l’Université Marc Bloch de Strasbourg no. 11. Strasbourg: Imprimerie de l’Université Marc Bloch, 2001. Gouhier, Henri. Blaise Pascal: Conversion et apologétique. Coll. Bibliothèque d’Histoire de la philosophie. Paris: Vrin, 1986. Gounelle, André. “Process Theology.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. JeanYves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 941–942. Gräb, Wilhelm. Lebensgeschichten – Lebensentwürfe – Sinndeutungen. Eine Praktische Theologie gelebter Religion, 2nd éd., Gütersloh, Gütersloher Verlagshaus/Kaiser, 2000. Grellier, Isabelle. “Les démarches de théologie pratique.” In Introduction à la théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf. Strasbourg: PUS, 1997, 41–58. Greshake, Gisbert. “Eschatologie.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002. 396–400. Gross, Peter. Jenseits der Erlösung: Die Wiederkehr der Religion und die Zukunft des Christentums. Coll. XTEXTE zu Kultur und Gesellschaft, 2nd ed. Bielefeld: Transcript, 2008. Guetny, Jean-Paul. “Le succès des obsèques religieuses dans une ‘France païenne.’” Esprit n° 333 (March–April 2007), 122–125. Guggenheim, Antoine. Les preuves de l’existence de Dieu: Des clefs pour le dialogue. Coll. Essais de l’école cathédrale. Paris: Parole et Silence, 2008.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 364

25-09-2021 09:27:43

Bibliography

365

Guillebaud, Jean-Claude. Comment je suis redevenu chrétien. Paris: Albin Michel, 2007. ———. La force de conviction. À quoi pouvons-nous croire? Coll. Points essais. Paris: Seuil, 2005. ———. Le goût de l’avenir. Coll. Points essais. Paris: Seuil, 2003. ———. La refondation du monde. Paris: Seuil, 1999. Günther, Wolfgang. “Mission in Europa als Thema der Weltmissionskonferenzen.” Europa: Christen, Kirchen und Missionen, coll. JbM 2006. Hamburg: Missionshilfe, 2006, 20–30. Habermas, Jürgen. With Ratzinger, Joseph. Dialektik der Säkularisierung: Über Vernunft und Religion. Freiburg i. Br./Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2005. ———. Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion. Philosophische Aufsätze. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2005. ———. Glauben und Wissen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2001. Hafner, Johann E. “Individualisierbarkeit des Religiösen? Die Pflege religiöser Grammatik als Aufgabe einer missionarischen Kirche.” In Deutschland– Missionsland: Zur Überwindung eines pastoralen Tabus, coll. Quaestiones disputatae no. 206, dir. Matthias Sellmann, Freiburg i. Br./Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2004, 169–176. Hahn, Ferdinand. Das Verständnis der Mission im Neuen Testament. Neukirchen: Neukirchner Verlag, 1963. Hamel, Martin. Bibel–Mission–Ökumene: Schriftverständnis und Schriftgebrauch in der neueren ökumenischen Missionstheologie. Coll. TVG. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1993. Harrison, Peter. The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. ———. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Härle, Wilfried. Dogmatik. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2nd revised ed. 2000. Hauerwas, Stanley. Le royaume de paix: Une initiation à l’éthique chrétienne. Coll. Theologica, trans. Pascale-Dominique Nau. Paris: Bayard, 2006. Hebding, Rémy. Kierkegaard. Coll. Temps et visages. Paris: Deslcée de Brouwer, 1999. Hengel, Martin. “Das früheste Christentum als eine jüdische messianische und universalistische Bewegung.” Theologische Beiträge 28 (August 1997) 197–210. ———. Earliest Christianity, London: SCM, 1986. Hervieu-Leger, Danièle. “Religion et modernité.” Le dictionnaire des sciences humaines. Paris: PUF, 2006, 981–983. ———. Catholicisme: la fin d’un monde. Paris: Bayard, 2003. ———. “La religion, mode de croire.” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 144–158. ———. Le pèlerin et le converti. La religion en movement. Paris: Flammarion, 1999. ———. La religion pour mémoire. Paris: Cerf, 1993.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 365

25-09-2021 09:27:44

366

Bibliography

———. “Faut-il définir la religion? Questions préalables à la construction d’une sociologie de la modernité religieuse.” Archives de sciences sociales des religions 32 no. 63/1 (January–March 1987) 11–30. Hiebert, Paul G. “Metatheologie: Ein Schritt über die Kontextualisierung hinaus.” Bilanz und Plan: Mission an der Schwelle zum dritten Jahrtausend, dir. Hans Kasdorf and Klaus W. Müller. Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1988, 396–400. ———. Mission et culture. Saint-Légier: Emmaüs, 2002. ———. Anthropological Reflections on Missiological Issues. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994. Hilbert, Gerhard. Kirchliche Volksmission. Leipzig: Deichert, 1916. Huber, Wolfgang. Kirche in der Zeitenwende: Gesellschaft licher Wandel und Erneuerung der Kirche, coll. GTB n° 924. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann-Stiftung, 1999. Hunsberger, George R. “Newbigin (James Edward) Lesslie (1909–1998).” Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, dir. A. Scott Moreau. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000, 688. Isambert, François-André. “Sécularisation.” Dictionnaire de l’Histoire du christianisme. Paris: Michel, 2000, 973–979. Jackson, Darrel and Passareli, Alessia. “Mapping Migration. Mapping Churches’ Responses: Europe Study.” Churches’ Commission for Migrants in Europe (CCME) and COE, 2008. www.oikoumene. org/fi leadmin/fi les/w​ cc-ma​ in/20​ 08pdf​s/map​ping_​migra​tion_​europ​e200 8.pdf (accessed August 7, 2008). Jacobs, Donald R. “Contextualization in Mission.” In Toward the Twenty-first Century in Christian Mission, dir. James M. Phillips and Robert T. Coote. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993, 218–234. Jaeger, Lydia: Croire et connaître: Einstein, Polanyi et les lois de la nature. Nogentsur-Marne/Cléon d’Andran: Institut Biblique/Excelsis, 1999. Jenkins, Philip. God’s Continent: Christianity, Islam and Europe’s Religious Crisis. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Jonas, Hans. Le principe responsabilité. Coll. Champs. Paris: Flammarion, 1994. Joncheray, Jean. “Théologie et sciences humaines.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau. Coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/ Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 167–178. Joncheray, Jean. “Comment peuvent travailler ensemble des sociologues, des théologiens, des pasteurs.” Revue des sciences religieuses no. 3 (1995) 322–333. Joutard, Philippe, dir. Du roi Très Chrétien à la laïcité républicaine (xviiie–xixe siècle). Histoire de la France religieuse, dir. Jacques Le Goff and René Rémond, vol. 3. Paris: Seuil, 1991. Jüngel, Eberhard. “La liberté, trait fondamental de la conception réformatrice de l’existence.” In Luther et la Réforme 1519–1526, dir. Jean-Paul Kahn and Gérard Schneilin, coll. Questions de civilization. Paris: Le temps, 2000, 77–90. Kaempf, Bernard. “Réception et évolution de la Théologie Pratique dans le protestantisme.” In Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 9–25.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 366

25-09-2021 09:27:44

Bibliography

367

———. “Histoire de la théologie pratique.” In Introduction à la théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf. Strasbourg: PUS, 1997, 13–39. ———. “Oïkodomique.” In Introduction à la théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf. Strasbourg: PUS, 1997, 201–224. Kähler, Martin. Schrift en zur Christologie und Mission. Coll. WMANT no. 13, 7th ed. Munich: Kaiser, 1971. Käser, Andreas. “Den Juden zuerst, aber auch den Heiden: ‘Mission’ im Markusevangelium: Beobachtungen einer kompositionellen Lesung von Mk 4,35–8,26, Theologische Beiträge 35 no. 2 (April 2004) 69–80. Keller, Carl-A. and Müller, Denis. “Spiritualité.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1472–1490. Keyes, Larry E. The Last Age of Missions: A Study of Third World Mission Societies. Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1983. Kiefer, Jean-Claude. “Editorial/Crise financière: La fin d’une époque.” Dernières Nouvelles d’Alsace no. 229 (30 September 2008) 3. Kierkegaard, Sören. Ou bien…ou bien, La reprise, Stades sur le chemin de la vie, La maladie à la mort. Coll. Bouquins Paris: Robert Laffont, 1993. Kirk, J. A. and Vanhoozer, K. J., dir. To Stake a Claim: Mission and the Western Crisis of Knowledge. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1999. Klement, Herbert H., dir. Evangelisation im Gegenwind. Zur Theologie und Praxis der Glaubensverkündigung in der säkularen Gesellschaft: Bericht von der 12. Studienkonferenz des Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Theologie 9. bis 12. Sept. 2001 in Bad Blankenburg. Coll. TVG. Giessen and Basel/Wuppertal: Brunnen/ Brockhaus, 2002. Klingberg, Max et al., dir. Märtyrer 2009: Das Jahrbuch für Christenverfolgung heute, coll. Idea Dokumentation. Bonn: VKW, 2009. Kolakowski, Leszek. “La revanche du sacré dans la culture profane.” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 55–61. ———. Husserl et la recherche de la certitude. Lausanne: L’Âge d’homme, 1991. ———. Philosophie de la religion. Paris: Fayard, 1985. Körtner, Ulrich H. J. “Zur Einführung: Hermeneutik und Ästhetik. Zur Bedeutung einer theologischen Ästhetik für die Lehre vom Wort Gottes.” In Hermeneutik und Ästhetik. Die Theologie des Wortes im multimedialen Zeitalter, dir. Ulrich H. J. Körnter. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchner Verlag, 2001, 1–18. Köstenberger, Andreas J. and O’Brien, Peter T. Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission. Coll. NSBT no. 11. Leicester/Downers Grove: Apollos/Inter-Varsity Press, 2001. Köstenberger, Andreas J. The Mission of Jesus and the Disciples according to the Fourth Gospel: With Implications for the Fourth Gospel’s Purpose and the Mission of Contemporary Church. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. ———. “Mission in the General Epistles.” In Mission in the New Testament: An Evangelical Approach. Coll. American Society of Missiology Series No. 27, dir. William J. Larkin Jr. and Joel F. Williams. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1998, 189–206. Kraemer, Hendrik. Théologie du laïcat. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1966.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 367

25-09-2021 09:27:44

368

Bibliography

Kreider, Alan, dir. The Origins of Christendom in the West. Edinburgh/New York: T&T Clark, 2001. Kuhn, Thomas S. La structure des révolutions scientifiques. Paris: Flammarion, 1983. Labbé, Yves. “Le concept d’inculturation.” Revue des sciences religieuses 80 no. 2 (April 2006) 205–215. Lacoste, Jean-Yves. “Herméneutique.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. JeanYves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 527–531. Lagrée, Jacqueline. “Déisme/Théisme.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. JeanYves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 305–306. Lambert, Yves. “Religion: l’Europe à un tournant.” In Futuribles no. 277 (July– August 2002) 129–159. ———. “Le devenir de la religion en Occident. Réflexion sociologique sur les croyances et les pratiques.” Futuribles no. 260 (January 2001) 23–38. ———. “Religion: développement du hors piste et de la Randonnée.” In Les valeurs des Français. Évolutions de 1980 à 2000, coll. U – Sociologie, dir. Pierre Bréchon. Paris: Arman Colin, 2000, 129–153. ———. et al., dir. Le religieux des sociologies: Trajectoires personnelles et débats scientifiques. Paris: L’Harmattan, 1997. ———. Yves, “Vers une ère post-chrétienne?” Futuribles special no. 200 (July– August 1995) 85–111. Langlois, Claude. “Déchristianisation, sécularisation et vitalité religieuse: Débats de sociologues et pratiques d’historiens.” In Säkularisierung, Dechristianisierung, Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa. Bilanz und Perspektiven der Forschung, dir. Hartmut Lehmann. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997, 154–173. Laplanche, François. “Sécularisation, déchristianisation, laïcisation en France (xvie– xixe siècles).” In Säkularisierung, Dechristianisierung, Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa: Bilanz und Perspektiven der Forschung, dir. Hartmut Lehmann. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997, 174–182. “La restauration religieuse en Europe de l’Est.” Social Compass 49 no. 4 (December 2002). Ledergerber, Gust. Das Wachstum der Gemeinde: Exegetische Untersuchungen zum Wesen des Gemeindewachstums im Neuen Testament. Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 2001. Ledure, Yves. Le christianisme en refondation. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 2002. Lehmann, Hartmut. “Von der Erforschung der Säkularisierung zur Erforschung von Prozessen der Dechristianisierung und der Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa.” In Säkularisierung, Dechristianisierung, Rechristianisierung im neuzeitlichen Europa. Bilanz und Perspektiven der Forschung, sous dir. Hartmut Lehmann. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997, 9–31. Lenoir, Frédéric. Le Christ philosophe. Paris: Plon, 2007. ———. “Vers un catholicisme minoritaire?” Le Monde des religions no. 21 (January–February 2007) 5. ———. Le bouddhisme en France. Paris: Fayard, 1999.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 368

25-09-2021 09:27:45

Bibliography

369

L’Espérance chrétienne dans le monde d’aujourd’hui: Message et rapports de la IIe Assemblée du COE, Evanston 1954. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1955. Leuba, Jean-Louis. L’institution et l’événement. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1950. Liechti, Daniel. “Étude statistique et cartographique.” Les Églises protestantes évangéliques en France, situation 2010, Supplément de l’Annuaire Évangélique 2011, 257–268. Lienemann-Perrin, Christine. Contextuality in Reformed Europe. The Mission of the Church in the Transformation of European Culture. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi, 2004. Lienhard, Fritz. With Schlemmer, François. “Mission intérieure.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 993. ———. La démarche de théologie pratique. Coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/ Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2006. ———. “Mission/Evangélisation.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 744–747. Lindbeck, Georg Arthur. La nature des doctrines. Religion et théologie à l’âge du postlibéralisme, trans. Mireille Hébert. Paris: Van Dieren, 2002. Link, Hans-Georg et al. “Versöhnung.” Theologisches Begriff slexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, dir. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther and Hans Bietenhard, 1st ed. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971, 1302–1313. Livingston, J. Kevin. “The Legacy of David J. Bosch.” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 23, no. 1 (January 1999) 26–32. Lohse, Bernhard. Luthers Theologie in ihrer historischen Entwicklung und in ihrem systematischen Zusammenhang. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995. Löwith, Karl. Histoire et Salut. Paris: Gallimard, 2002. Luckmann, Thomas. Das Problem der Religion in der modernen Gesellschaft: Institution, Person und Weltanschauung. Freiburg i. Br.: Rombach, 1963. Luhmann, Niklas. Die Religion der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2000. Luther, Martin. Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe-Tischreden). Weimar: Böhlau, 1938. Luz, Ulrich. Matthäus 1–7: Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Coll. EKK vol. I/1, 5th revised ed. Düsseldorf/Zurich/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger/Neukirchner Verlag, 2002. Lyotard, Jean-François. La condition postmoderne: Rapport sur le savoir. Paris: Minuit, 1979. Maddox, Graham. Religion and the Rise of Democracy. London/New York: Routledge, 1996. Manale, Margaret. “Les rapports entre l’Église et l’État en RDA: Protestantisme et politique à l’Est de 1949 à 1990.” In Les religions à l’Est, dir. Patrick Michel. Paris: Cerf, 1992, 87–107. Marguerat, Daniel, dir. Introduction au Nouveau Testament: Son histoire, son écriture,sa théologie, 3rd ed. Coll. Le monde de la Bible no. 41. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 369

25-09-2021 09:27:45

370

Bibliography

———. La première histoire du christianisme (Les Actes des apôtres). Coll. LeDiv no. 180. Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 1999. Mayeur, Jean-Marie et al., dir. Histoire du christianisme, des origines à nos jours. Paris: Desclée, 1990/1995/1997/2000. McLeod, Hugh and Ustorf, Werner. The Decline of Christendom in Western Europe, 1750–2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. McPolin, James. “Mission in the Forth Gospel.” Irish Theological Quarterly 36 no. 2 (April 1969) 113–122. Merklein, Helmut. “Christus als Bild Gottes im Neuen Testament.” Die Macht der Bilder, coll. JBTh vol. 13. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999, 53–75. Messina, Jean-Paul, dir. L’inculturation en débat. Conférences théologiques, Yaoundé-Nkolbisson, 12–15 mars 1996. Coll. Les publications du Conseil scientifique no. 4. Yaoundé: Presses Universitaires, 1996. Michelat, Guy. et al. L’héritage chrétien en disgrace. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003. ———. “L’univers des croyances.” In L’héritage chrétien en disgrâce, dir. Guy Michelat et al. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003, 69–124. ———. “L’essor des croyances parallèles.” Futuribles no. 260 (January 2001) 61–72. ———. et al. Les Français sont-ils encore catholiques? Analyse d’un sondage d’opinion. Paris: Cerf, 1991. Milbank, John. “Libération (Théologie de la).” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 655–656. “Mission et communication.” Perspectives missionnaires no. 57 (2009). Morley, Jean-Paul. “Mission populaire évangélique.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 993–994. Moser, Félix. Les croyants non pratiquants. coll. Pratiques no. 12. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994. Müller, Klaus W., dir. Mission im postmodernen Europa: Referate der Jahrestagung 2008 des Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Missiologie. Coll. Afem mission reports no. 16. Nuremberg: VTR, 2008. Mundle, Wilhelm et al. “Erlösung.” Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, dir. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther and Hans Bietenhard, 1st ed. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971, 258–272. Nemo, Philippe. Qu’est-ce que l’Occident? Coll. Quadrige, essais-débats. Paris: PUF, 2004. Netland, Harold A. Dissonant Voices. Religious Pluralism and the Question of Truth, Grand Rapids/Leicester, Eerdmans/Apollos, 1991. Translated into German as Religiöser Pluralismus und die Wahrheitsfrage. Trans. Hans-Peter Rosen and Thomas Mayer. Nuremberg: VTR, 1999. Neuer, Werner. “Schöpfung und Gesetz bei Adolf Schlatter.” In Begründung ethischer Normen, dir. Helmut Burkhardt. Wuppertal/Giessen/Basel: Brockhaus/ Brunnen, 1988, 115–130. Neuner, Peter. “Die Hellenisierung des Christentums als Modell von Inkulturation.” Stimmen der Zeit 120 no. 6 (June 1995) 363–376.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 370

25-09-2021 09:27:46

Bibliography

371

Newbigin, Lesslie. “Can the West be Converted?” IBMR II no. 1 (January 1987) 2–7. Translated into French as “L’Occident peut-il se convertir?” Perspectives missionnaires no. 29 (1995) 7–26. ———. Truth to Tell. The Gospel as Public Truth. Coll. WCC Publications. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. ———. The Gospel in a Pluralist Society. Coll. WCC Publications. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989. ———. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. Coll. WCC Mission Series no. 6. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1986. ———. Unfinished Agenda: An Autobiography. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1985. Nicole, Jacques. “Evangélisation.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 552. ———. “Newbigin, James Edward Lesslie (1909–).” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 1071–1072. Novalis. Monolog, Die Lehrlinge zu Sais, Die Christenheit oder Europa, Hymnen an die Nacht, Geistliche Lieder, Heinrich von Oft erdingen. Coll. Rowohlts Klassiker der Literatur und der Wissenschaft. Deutsche Literatur vol. 11. Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1967. Oeldermann, Johann. “L’orthodoxie, deuxième poumon de l’Europe?” Esprit no. 333 (March–April 2007) 74–81. Okure, Teresa. The Johannine Approach to Mission: A Contextual Study of John 4:1–42. Coll. WUNT, 2. Reihe, Bd. 31. Tubingen: Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988. Olivier, Paul. “Preuves de l’existence de Dieu.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 931–935. Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1991. Ott, Craig. “Die Kontextualisierung neutestamentlicher Ekklesiologie im Gemeindebau.” In Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche. Gemeindeaufb au auf der Basis einer biblisch erneuerten Ekklesiologie, dir. Helge Stadelmann, coll. TVG. Giessen/Basel/Wuppertal: Brunnen/Brockhaus, 1998, 220–246. Pabst, Adrian and Venard, Olivier-Thomas. Radical Orthodoxy: Pour une révolution théologique. Coll. Angles Vifs. Paris: Ad Solem, 2004. Pace, Enzo. “Sociology of religion: the state of art.” In Eastern European Religion, dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 5. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2006, 13–31. Pannenberg, Wolfhart. Wissenschaftstheorie und Theologie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1973. ———. dir. Offenbarung als Geschichte. 2nd ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963. Parmentier, Elisabeth. Les filles prodigies: Défis des théologies feminists. Coll. Lieux théologiques no. 32. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1998. Paschke, Boris Alexander. “Particularism and Universalism in the Sermon on the Mount.” Doctoral thesis at the Faculté de théologie évangélique de Louvain, 2009. Pate, Larry D. From Every People: A Handbook of Two-thirds World Missions. Monrovia: MARC, 1989.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 371

25-09-2021 09:27:46

372

Bibliography

Peelan, Achiel. Les nouveaux défis de l’inculturation. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2007. Pénoukou, Efoé-Julien. “Inculturation.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. JeanYves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 567–570. Peters, George W. A Biblical Theology of Missions. Chicago: Moody, 1984. Translated into German as Missionarisches Handeln und biblischer Auft rag. Eine biblisch-evangelische Missionstheologie. 2nd ed. Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1985. Petrus, Johannes und Judas. Coll. NTD vol. 10, 13th revised ed. Göttingen/Zurich: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985. Picard, Olivier. “Editorial/Marchés et sociétés. Le mot clé.” Dernières Nouvelles d’Alsace no. 236 (8 October 2008) 3. Piette, Albert. Le fait religieux: Une théorie de la religion ordinaire. Coll. Études sociologiques. Paris: Economica, 2003. Pilvousek, Josef. “Widerstand und Konformismus.” Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel)Europa. Deutschland-Ost, dir. Reinhard Grütz et al., coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus. Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2003, 19–29. Polanyi, Michaël. La logique de la liberté. Paris: PUF, 1989. ———. The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967. ———. Science, Faith and Society, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1964. ———. Personal Knowledge. Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958. Pollak, Detlef. “Die Entwicklung von Religion und Kirche in Ost- und Westdeutschland seit 1990.” Woran glauben? Religion zwischen Kulturkampf und Sinnsuche, dir. Gerd Nollmann & Herrmann Strasser. Essen: Klartext, 2007, 78–107. ———. “Religiousness Inside and Outside the Church in Selected Post-Communist Countries of Central and Eastern Europe.” Social Compass 50 no. 3 (September 2003) 321–334. ———. Säkularisierung—ein moderner Mythos? Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. Popkes, Wiard. “Zum Verständnis der Mission bei Johannes.” Zeitschrift für Mission IV no. 2 (1978) 63–69. Potel, Julien. “Morts, après-mort et au-delà: des croyances perturbées.” L’héritage chrétien en disgrâce, dir. Guy Michelat et al. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2003, 159–192. Poulat, Émile. ———. “Anamnèse.” Anamnèsis. Histoire du christianisme (Des origines à nos jours), vol. XIV. Dir. Jean-Marie Mayeur et al. Paris: Desclée/Fayard, 2000, 259–278. ———. Les prêtres-ouvriers: Naissance et fin. Paris: Cerf, 1999. ———. Liberté, laïcité: La guerre des deux France et le principe de la modernité. Coll. Religion et sociétés. Paris: Cerf/Cujas, 1987. ———. “Epistémologie.” L’état des sciences sociales en France, dir. Marc Guillaume: Paris: La Découverte, 1986, 399–400. ———. Église contre bourgeoisie. Introduction au devenir du catholicisme actuel. Tournai: Castermann, 1977.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 372

25-09-2021 09:27:46

Bibliography

373

Prigent, Pierre. L’Apocalypse de Saint Jean. Coll. Commentaire du Nouveau Testament, 2nd series no. XIV, 2nd revised ed. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988. Prudky, Libor et al. Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Tschechien, Kroatien, Polen. Coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus. Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2001. Ratzmann, Wolfgang. “Praktische Theologie: ein unübersichtliches Fach in didaktischer Herausforderung.” Didaktische Modelle Praktischer Theologie, dir. Martin Steinhäuser and Wolfgang Ratzmann. Leipzig: Evang. Verlagsanstalt, 2002, 11–28. “Recensement du 29 avril 2001 au Royaume-Uni.” http:​/​/www​​.stat​​istic​​s​.gov​​.uk​/c​​ ci​/nu​​gget.​​a​sp​?i​​d​=954​; http:​/​/www​​.stat​​i​-sti​​cs​.go​​v​.uk/​​censu​​s2001​​/prof​​i les/​​comme​​ ntari​​es​/un​​it​ed_​​kingd​​om​.as​​p; http:​/​/www​​.stat​​istic​​s​.gov​​.uk​/c​​ensus​​2​001/​​profi​ les/ commentaries/ethnicity​.as​p; http://www​.eurel​.info​/FR​/index​.php (accessed June 26, 2008). Recht, Roland. “Évitons la catastrophe! Le regard critique de Roland Recht sur les évolutions récentes de la politique des musées en France.” Les saisons d’Alsace no. 40 (summer 2009) 34–35. Reden von Gott in der Welt—Der missionarische Auft rag der Kirche an der Schwelle zum 3. Jahrtausend, EKD-Synode Leipzig. Frankfurt: GEP, 2000. Rémond, René, dir. Les grandes inventions du christianisme. Paris: Bayard, 1999. ———. Religion et société en Europe: Essai sur la sécularisation des sociétés européennes aux xixe et xxe siècles (1789–1998). Paris: Seuil, 1998. ———. “Un chapitre inachevé (1958–1990).” Société sécularisée et renouveaux religieux (xxe siècle), Histoire de la France religieuse vol. 4, dir. Étienne Fouilloux et al. Paris: Seuil, 1992, 347–459. “Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?” UN Population Division, 2000. http://www​.un. org/e​sa/po​pulat​ion/m​igrat​ion/m​igrat​ ion/h​tm (accessed November 30, 2008). Riecker, Siegbert. Mission im Alten Testament? Ein Forschungsüberblick mit Auswertung. Coll. Beiheft Interkulturelle Theologie, Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft, vol. 10. Frankfurt: Otto Lembeck, 2008. Riffaut, Hélène, dir. Les valeurs des Français. Paris: PUF, 1994. Rognon, Frédéric. “La foi au risque du doute.” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 88, no. 1 (January—March 2008), 21–53. ———. Jacques Ellul: une pensée en dialogue. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2007. Rommen, Edward. Namenschristentum: Theologisch-soziologische Erwägungen. Bad Liebenzell: Liebenzeller Mission, 1985. Rorty, Richard. L’espoir au lieu du savoir: Introduction au pragmatism. Coll. Bibliothèque du Collège international de philosophie. Paris: Albin Michel, 1995. Roth, Andrei. “Religiöse und kirchliche Entwicklungen in Rumänien nach 1989.” Religiöser Wandel in den postkommunistischen Ländern Ost- und Mitteleuropas, dir. Detlef Pollak et al., coll. Religion in der Gesellschaft no. 6. Würzburg: Ergon, 1998, 317–345. Russell, James C. The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity: A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious Transformation. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 373

25-09-2021 09:27:47

374

Bibliography

Rutter, Ian. “Une analyse des fondements théologiques des déclarations récentes du Conseil oecuménique des Églises, de l’Église catholique romaine et du mouvement évangélique à propos de la mission et de l’évangélisation.” Doctoral thesis at the Faculté de Théologie protestante de l’Université Marc Bloch, Strasbourg, en sept. 2004. Saint-Sernin, Bertrand. Le rationalisme qui vient. Paris: Gallimard, 2007. Sautter, Gerhard. Heilsgeschichte und Mission: Zum Verständnis der Heilsgeschichte in der Missionstheologie. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1985. Scherrer, Steven J. “Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult: A New Look at a Roman Religious Institution in the Light of Rev. 13:13–15.” Journal of Biblical Literature 103 no. 4 (December 1984) 599–610. Schleiermacher, Daniel Friedrich Ernst. Le statut de la théologie: Bref exposé. Trans. Bernard Kaempf with Pierre Bühler. Geneva/Paris: Labor et Fides/Cerf, 1994. Schlichting, Wolfhart. “Zeigt die ‘Natur’ was ‘Recht’ ist? Die Aufnahme des Naturrechtsgedankens in E. Brunners ‘erechtigkeit.’” Begründung ethischer Normen, dir. Helmut Burkhardt. Wuppertal/Giessen/Basel: R. Brockhaus/Brunnen, 1988, 131–146. Schlosser, Jacques and Hunermann, Peter. “Royaume de Dieu.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 1029–1034. Schmidt, Thomas, and Wohlrab-Sahr, Monika. “Still the Most Areligious Part of the World: Developments in the Religious Field in Eastern Germany since 1990.” International Journal of Practical Theology 7 no. 1 (2003) 86–100. Schnabel, Eckhard J. “Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments als Missionstheologie: Die missionarische Realität der Kirche des ersten Jahrhunderts und die Theologie der ersten Theologen.” Jahrbuch für Evangelikale Theologie 20 (2006) 39–164. ———. Urchristliche Mission. Coll. TV. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 2002. Schnackenburg, Rudolf. Das Johannesevangelium, IV: Teil, Ergänzende Auslegungen und Exkurse. Coll. HTh K vol. IV, 3rd ed. Fribourg/Basel/Vienna: Herder, 1994. Schröder, Sabine. Konfessionslose erreichen: Gemeindegründungen von freikirchlichen Initiativen seit der Wende 1989 in Ostdeutschland. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchner Verlag, 2007. Schweitzer, Albert. Strassburger Predigten. Dir. Ulrich Neuenschwander, coll. Beck’sche Reihe no. 307, 3rd ed. Munich: Beck, 1993, 53–61. Schweitzer, Louis, dir. Conviction et dialogue: Le dialogue interreligieux. Cléon d’Andran/Vaux-sur-Seine: Excelsis/Édifac, 2000. Schweyer, Stefan. Kontextuelle Kirchentheorie: Eine kritisch konstruktive Auseinandersetzung mit dem Kirchenverständnis neuerer praktisch-theologischer Entwürfe. Zürich: TVZ, 2007. Seebass, Horst. “Gerechtigkeit.” Theologisches Begriff slexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 1, dir. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther and Hans Bietenhard, 1st ed. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971, 502–509. Sellmann, Matthias. “Einführung.” Deutschland—Missionsland: Zur Überwindung eines pastoralen Tabus, dir. Matthias Sellmann, coll. Quaestiones disputatae no. 206. Fribourg e. B./Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2004, 9–24.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 374

25-09-2021 09:27:47

Bibliography

375

Sève, Bernard. La question philosophique de l’existence de Dieu. 2nd revised ed. Paris: PUF, 1997. Shenk, Wilbert R. “Contemporary Europe in Missiological Perspective.” Missiology XXXV no. 2 (April 2007) 125–140. ———. “The Culture of Modernity as a Missionary Challenge.” The Good News of the Kingdom. Mission Theology of the Third Millenium, dir. Charles Van Engen et al. Maryknoll/New York: Orbis, 1993, 192–199. Shorter, Aylward W. F. Toward a Theology of Inculturation. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1988. Sievernich, Michael. Die christliche Mission: Geschichte und Gegenwart. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2009. Simoens, Yves. Une interpretation: Apocalypse de Jean—Apocalypse de JésusChrist, vol. II. Paris: Facultés Jésuites de Paris, 2008. Sinclair, Christopher. “Le protestantisme alsacien-mosellan: du terroir paroissial à la dispersion conversionniste.” La recomposition des protestantismes en Europe latine. Entre émotion et tradition, dir. Jean-Pierre Bastian. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004, 223–250. ———, dir. Actualité des protestantismes évangéliques. Strasbourg: PUS, 2002. Spaemann, Robert. Das unsterbliche Gerücht: Die Frage nach Gott und die Täuschung der Moderne. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2007. ———. Der letzte Gottesbeweis: Mit einer Einführung in die grossen Gottesbeweise und einem Kommentar zum Gottesbeweis Robert Spaemanns von Rolf Schönberger. Munich: Pattloch, 2007. Spindler, Marc. With Lenoble-Bart, Annie, dirs. Chrétiens d’Outre-mer en Europe: Un autre visage de l’immigration. Paris: Karthala, 2000. ———. “Missions populaires.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie: Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 219–223. ———. “Occident, terre de mission.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé, Cerf/Labor et Fides/ CLÉ, 2001, 237–240. ———. “Aux origines de la missiologie: Gustav Warneck.” Perspectives missionnaires 2 no. 34 (1997) 23–33. ———. Pour une théologie de l’espace. Coll. Cahiers théologiques no. 59, Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1968. Steck, Wolfgang. Praktische Theologie: Horizonte der Religion, Konturen des neuzeitlichen Christentums, Strukturen des religiösen Lebens der Welt, vol. 1. Coll. Th W no. 15. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2000. Steinacker, Peter. Die Kennzeichen der Kirche: Eine Studie zu ihrer Einheit, Heiligkeit, Katholizität und Apostolizität. Coll. TBT vol 38, Berlin/New-York: de Gruyter, 1982. Stuhlmacher, Peter. “Grundlegung: Von Jesus zu Paulus.” Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testamentes, vol. 1, 2nd ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997. ———. “Weg, Stil und Konsequenzen urchristlicher Mission.” Theologische Beiträge 12 no. 3 (1981) 107–135.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 375

25-09-2021 09:27:48

376

Bibliography

Sutter, Jacques. La vie religieuse des Français à travers les sondages d’opinion (1944–1976). 2 vols. Paris: CNRS, 1984. Swarat, Uwe. “Notae ecclesiae: Woran ist die Kirche Jesu Christi erkennbar?.” Bausteine zur Erneuerung der Kirche. Gemeindeaufb au auf der Basis einer biblisch erneuerten Ekklesiologie, coll. TVG, dir. Helge Stadelmann. Giessen/Basel/ Wuppertal: Brunnen/Brockhaus, 1998, 169–190. Tanase, Laurentiu D. Pluralisation religieuse et société en Roumanie. Coll. EHS, série xxii Sociologie, no. 422. Berne/Berlin/Brussels/Frankfurt/New York/Oxford/ Vienna: Peter Lang, 2008. Tanase, Laurentiu D. “Les nouveaux mouvements religieux en Roumanie de la chute du communisme à aujourd’hui.” Doctoral thesis at Université Marc Bloch de Strasbourg, 2005. Tarot, Camille. Le symbolique et le sacré: Théories de la religion. Paris: La Découverte/M.A.U.S.S., 2008. “Taux de fécondité en Europe.” http:​/​/www​​.tout​​eleur​​o​-pe.​​fr​/fr​​/acti​​ons​/s​​​ocial​​/sant​ é-pub​lique​/prés​entat​ion/c​ompar​atif-​le-ta​ux-de​-féco​ndité​​-dans​​-les-​​etats​​-memb​​res​.h​​ tml (accessed August 7, 2008). Terme, Jacques. Mutations et crises dans l’Église réformée de France: Le Journal Horizons Protestants 1971–1975. Lyon: Olivétan, 2007. Ternisien, Xavier. “Les Églises afro-chrétiennes font de la France une terre d’évangélisation.” Le Monde, 3 Jan. 2001. Terstriep, Dominik. “Theologie kommt vom Gottesdienst her und geht auf ihn hin: Oswald Bayers gottesdienstlich-weisheitliche Theologie.” Wirksames Wort. Zum reformatorischen Wortverständnis und seiner Aufnahme in der Theologie Oswald Bayers, dir. Johannes Von Lüpke and Johannes Schwanke. Wuppertal: Foedus, 2004, 9–32. Teuffel, Jochen. Mission als Namenszeugnis: Eine Ideologiekritik in Sachen Religion. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. Theissen, Gerd. La religion des premiers chrétiens: Une théorie du christianisme primitive. Paris/Geneva: Cerf/Labor et Fides, 2002. Tiefensee, Eberhard. “Chancen und Grenzen von ‘Mission’—im Hinblick auf die konfessionelle Situation in den neuen Bundesländern.” Gemeindepfl anzung, ein Modell für die Kirche der Zukunft?, dir. Matthias Bartels and Martin Reppenhagen, coll. Beiträge zu Evangelisation und Gemeindeentwicklung no. 4. NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchner Verlag, 2006, 68–85. Tillich, Paul. Introduction, première partie. Raison et Révélation. Théologie systématique, vol. 1, Geneva/Paris/Laval: Labor et Fides/Cerf/Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2000. ———. Substance catholique et principe protestant. Paris/Genève/Laval: Cerf/Labor et Fides/Presses de l’Université de Laval, 1996. ———. Théologie de la culture. Paris: Planètes, 1968. Tomka, Miklos. With Zulehner, Paul M. Religion im gesellschaft lichen Kontext Ost (Mittel) Europas. Coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus, Ostfildern, Schwabenverlag, 2000.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 376

25-09-2021 09:27:48

Bibliography

377

———. “The Non-Religious.” Eastern European Religion, dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 5. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2006, 103–120. ———. “Religion in den neuen Bundesländern—im internationalen Vergleich.” Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa: Deutschland-Ost, dir. Karl Gabriel et al., coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus. Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 2003, 343–370. ———. “Introduction.” Social Compass 49 no. 4 (December 2002) 483–495. ———. “Tendances de la religiosité et de l’orientation vers les Églises en Europe de l’Est.” Social Compass 49 no. 4 (December 2002) 537–552. ———. et al. Religion und Kirchen in Ost (Mittel) Europa. Ungarn, Litauen, Slowenien. Coll. Gott nach dem Kommunismus. Ostfildern: Schwabenverlag, 1999. Triebel, Johannes. Bekehrung als Ziel der missionarischen Verkündigung: Die Theologie Walter Freytags und das ökumenische Gespräch. Coll. Erlanger Taschenbücher n° 35, Monographien: Missionstheologie. Erlangen: Ev.-luth. Mission, 1976. Trigano, Shmuel. Les torsions de la transcendence.” Revue du MAUSS no. 22 (2nd semester 2003) 51–54. ———. Qu’est-ce que la religion? La transcendance des sociologies. Coll. Champs. Paris: Flammarion, 2001. Trillhaas, Wolfgang. Dogmatik. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1972. Tschannen, Olivier. Les théories de la sécularisation. Geneva: Droz, 1992. Ugeux, Bernard. “Évangéliser et guérir: Quel salut pour aujourd’hui?” Appel à témoins. Mutations sociales et avenir de la mission chrétienne, dir. Geneviève Comeau and Jean-François Zorn, coll. Théologie de la mission. Paris: Cerf, 2004, 89–117. Valadier, Paul. Un christianisme d’avenir: Pour une nouvelle alliance entre raison et foi. Paris: Seuil, 1999. Van Raalte, Jan. “Western Europe—The Netherlands: Emancipation and Pluralization.” Missiology, An Ecumenical Introduction. Texts and Contexts of Global Christianity, dir. F. J. Verstraelen. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995, 31–48. Vattimo, Gianni. Après la chrétienté: Pour un christianisme non religieux. Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 2004. ———. Espérer croire. Paris: Seuil, 1998. Veil, Simone and Falco, Hubert. “Nous sommes allés à Auschwitz parce que le mal n’est pas mort. La mémoire de la Shoah doit être sans cesse ravivée dans nos consciences.” Le Monde (29 January 2010) 16. Verkuyl, Johannes. Contemporary Missiology: An Introduction. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. Viallaneix, Nelly. “Kierkegaard, Sören-Aabye.” Encyclopédie du Protestantism, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 827–828. Viau, Marcel. “De la théologie pastorale à la théologie pratique.” Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal, Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 41–53.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 377

25-09-2021 09:27:48

378

Bibliography

———. “La méthodologie empirique en théologie pratique.” Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques, Brussels/ Montreal, Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 87–98. Vincent, Gilbert. “Églises et religion civile: Enjeux et limites de l’oecuménisme.” L’Europe à la recherche de son âme: Les Églises entre l’Europe et la Nation, dir. Gilbert Vincent et al. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1999, 173–200. Voicu, Malina. “Religiosity and Religious Revival in Romania.” Church and Religious Life in Post-Communist Societies, dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 7. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2007, 13–32. Voicu, Malina. “How secular is Romania?” Eastern European Religion, sous dir. Edit Revay and Miklos Tomka, coll. Pazmany Tarsadalomtudomany no. 5. Budapest: Piliscsaba, 2006, 203–222. Von Balthasar, Hans Urs. La Gloire et la Croix: Les aspects esthétiques de la revelation, 4 vols. Paris: Aubier, 1965–1983. ———. La Dramatique divine. 4 vols. Paris/Namur: Lethielleux/Culture et vérité, 1984–1993. ———. Theologik. 3 vols. Einsiedeln/Trèves: Johannes, 1987. Von Gryter, Florian Wilk. Jesus und die Völker in der Sicht der Synoptiker. Coll. BZNW no. 109, Berlin/New York: Walter De Gruyter, 2002. Vorländer, Herwart. “Vergebung.” Theologisches Begriff slexikon zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, dir. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther and Hans Bietenhard, 1st ed. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1971, 1263–1267. Walldorf, Friedemann. Die Neuevangelisierung Europas: Missionstheologien im europäischen Kontext. Coll. Systematisch-theologische Monografien no. 8. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 2002. “Weltmission vor der Haustür: Werist Sender, wer Empfänger?” Evangelikale Missiologie 25 no. 3 (2009). Wenin, André, et al. “Âme-coeur-corps.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 24–33. Werbieck, Jürgen. “Trugbilder oder Suchbilder? Ein Versuch über die Schwierigkeit, das biblische Bilderverbot theologisch zu befolgen.” Die Macht der Bilder, coll. JBTh vol. 13. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999, 3–27. Werner, Dietrich. “The Future of the Rural Church: Perspectives on the Rural Evangelism in a German Context.” International Review of Mission 96 no. 382– 383 (July–October 2007) 296–305. ———. Wiederentdeckung einer missionarischen Kirche. Coll. Berklumer Beiträge zur ökumenischen Erneuerung, Christlicher Glaube in der Einen Welt no. 8. Hambourg: EB, 2005. ———. “Mission in Deutschland.” Leitfaden ökumenischer Missionstheologie, dir. Christoph Dahling-Sander et al. Gütersloh: Kaiser/Gütersloher, 2003, 545–561. Werner, Karl-Ferdinand. “D’où l’Europe nous vient-elle?” Religions et transformations de l’Europe, dir. Gilbert Vincent and Jean-Paul Willaime. Strasbourg: PUS, 1993, 19–31. Wertheim, Margaret. The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace: A History of Space from Dante to the Internet. New York: Norton, 1999.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 378

25-09-2021 09:27:49

Bibliography

379

Wessels, Anton. Europe: Was It Ever Really Christian? The Interaction between Gospel and Culture. London: SCM, 1994. Wetzel, Klaus. Bevölkerungsentwicklung und Mission. Coll. Korntaler Reihe no. 4. Nuremberg: VTR, 2006. ———. Wo die Kirchen wachsen: Der geistliche Aufbruch in der Zwei-DrittelWelt und die Folgen für das Christentum. Coll. TVG-Orientierung. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1998. Willaime, Jean-Paul. “Reconfigurations ultramodernes.” Esprit no. 333 (March— April 2007) 146–155. ———. Sociologie du protestantisme. Coll. Que-sais-je? Paris: PUF, 2005. ———. Europe et religions: Les enjeux du xxie siècle. Coll. Les dieux dans la Cité. Paris: Fayard, 2004. ———. Sociologie des religions. Coll. Que sais-je? 3rd ed. Paris: PUF, 2004. ———. “Europe.” Encyclopédie du protestantisme, dir. Pierre Gisel, 2nd revised and expanded ed. Paris: PUF, 2006, 533–550. ———. La précarité protestante: Sociologie du protestantisme contemporain. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1992. Wilson, Stephen G. The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts. Coll. Society for NT Studies, Monographies Series no. 23. Cambridge: University Press, 1973. Wischmeyer, Oda. “Die paulinische Mission als religiöse und literarische Kommunikation.” Die Anfänge des Christentums, dir. Friedrich Wilhelm Graf. Frankfurt: Fischer Taschenbuch, 2009, 90–121. Wolff, Hans Walter. Anthropologie des Alten Testaments, 5th ed. Munich: Kaiser, 1990. Wolton, Dominique. Internet. Petit manuel de survie. Paris: Flammarion, 2000. Wood, Ian N. The Missionary Life. Saints and the Evangelisation of Europe, 400– 1050. Harlow: Pearson, 2001. Zeegers-Vander Vorst, Nicole. “Apologistes.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 74–76. Zorn, Jean-François. “Entreprendre la mission et l’évangélisation.” Précis de théologie pratique, dir. Gilles Routhier and Marcel Viau, coll. Théologies pratiques. Brussels/Montreal: Lumen Vitae/Novalis, 2004, 253–272. ———. La missiologie. Émergence d’une discipline théologique, coll. Actes et recherches. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2004. ———. “Contextualisation.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de missiologie: Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 67–70. ———. “Laïc, Laïcat.” Dictionnaire oecuménique de la mission. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria, Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 181–184. ———. “Mission (Missio Dei).” Dictionnaire oecuménique de la mission. Cent mots pour la mission, dir. Ion Bria. Paris/Geneva/Yaoundé: Cerf/Labor et Fides/CLÉ, 2001, 216–218. ———. “Introduction: Essai de typologie des interprétations chrétiennes des autres religions et leurs implications missiologiques.” L’alterité religieuse, un défi pour

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 379

25-09-2021 09:27:49

380

Bibliography

la mission chrétienne xviie–xxe siècles, dir. Françoise Jacquin and Jean-François Zorn, coll. Mémoire d’Églises. Paris: Karthala, 2001, 11–29. ———. “La contextualisation: un concept théologique?” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 77 no. 2 (1997) 171–189. ———. “Mission et évangélisation.” Introduction à la théologie pratique, dir. Bernard Kaempf. Strasbourg: PUS, 1997, 315–338. ———. “La Foi Protestante à l’heure des Nouvelles Demandes de Spiritualités,” Foi et Vie XCVI no. 5 (December 1997) 57–71. ———. “Die Mission hat eine Vergangenheit—hat sie auch Zukunft?” Ökumenische Rundschau 43 no. 1 (January 1994) 60–71. ———. “Les espaces de la Mission.” Autres Temps 43 (September 1994) 48–55. Zumstein, Jean. With Dettwiler, Andreas. “Esprit Saint A. Théologie biblique II. NT.” Dictionnaire critique de théologie, dir. Jean-Yves Lacoste, 1st ed. “Quadrige.” Paris: PUF, 2002, 405–406. ———. L’évangile selon saint Jean (13–17). Coll. Commentaire du NT IVb, 2nd series. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2007.

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 380

25-09-2021 09:27:50

Index

acculturation, 105 Action catholique, 45 Action française, 45, 96n29 Ad gentes, 256, 327n125 anglicanism, 59–62, 66–68, 91–92, 109 anthropocentrism, 166, 197 anthropology, 8, 15, 24, 165–66, 198; theological, 107, 191, 215, 238–40, 248n67, 260–61, 299, 330 apartheid, 109–110 apologetics, 162–167, 288–89 Aquinas, St. Thomas, 2, 116, 163, 215 Arendt, Hannah, 126–28, 177n28 Aristotle, 2, 168, 215, 231, 250n96 Arrupe, Pedro, 106 atheism, 91, 94, 119, 166 Auberlen, Karl August, 296 Auerbach, Erich, 147, 181n124 baptism, 6, 56, 61–62, 85, 89, 296, 317; of the Holy Spirit, 313, 325n78 Barrett, David B., 154, 182n147 Barth, Karl, 47, 117, 222, 231–32, 250n98, 250n105, 296 Bastian, Jean-Pierre, 31n57, 51–52, 98n47, 98n49, 102n113, 321n48 Baubérot, Jean, 28n14, 44, 50, 54, 96n18, 96n26, 97n37, 98n51, 212, 247n51

Bauckham, Richard, 278–79, 284, 321n43, 322n49, 323nn53–57, 327n118 Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb, 168 Bayer, Oswald, 295, 301, 303, 324n74, 325n90, 326n95, 327n98 beauty, 167–70, 196, 220–21, 225, 281, 283 Bechmann, Ulrike, 213, 248n63 believing without belonging, 57, 66–68, 99n76, 273, 333 Belting, Hans, 170–71, 184n189, 185n191, 284 Benedict XVI, 51 Bengel, Johann Albrecht, 245n10, 295 Berger, Peter, 117, 177n43, 178n68 Beyerhaus, Peter, 230, 250n94, 295, 325nn75–76, 326n105, 327n109 Bible, 15, 22, 36, 117, 148, 166, 189, 192, 196, 198, 201, 209, 222, 224, 228, 230, 237, 246n9, 258, 294, 341, 346 Birmelé, André, 332, 337n3 Blough, Neal, 28n12, 177n30, 210, 246n31, 248n53 Bosch, David J., x, 1–2, 27n1, 28nn10– 15, 29nn19–26, 108–10, 115–120, 175nn4–6, 176n17, 177n27, 177nn36–49, 178n52, 187, 189–190, 192–5, 243, 245nn1–8, 246nn11–31, 381

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 381

25-09-2021 09:27:50

382

Index

292, 302, 324n68, 325n86, 326n105, 351–2 Bourdieu, Pierre, 125 Boy, Daniel, 135, 180n97 Brunner, Emil, 250n105, 255, 319n5 Buddhism, 55, 64 Büker, Markus, 115, 176n21, 177n27– 39, 178n51, 245n6 Bultmann, Rudolf, 30n37, 117, 223, 231, 294 Bünker, Arnd, 256–57, 319n13, 337n8 Burkhardt, Helmut, 29n18, 178n50, 211, 232, 248nn54–58, 249n71, 249n80, 250n100, 319nn4–5 Caillé, Alain, 126, 179n75 Calvin, John, 250n105, 255; Calvinism, 62, 70, 76 Campiche, Roland, 95n10, 120, 178n56 Carolingian, 145–46 Casanova, José, 157, 189n152 catechesis, 23, 106 Catholicism, Roman, 48, 91, 97n37, 141, 144, 256, 280; in France, 39, 44, 46, 51, 58, 98n49, 106; in the United Kingdom, 58, 63 Causse, Jean-Daniel, 199–200, 208, 247nn37–38, 247n49 Ceausescu, Nicolae, 71 Champion, Françoise, 134–136 charismatic, 48, 53–55, 120, 154, 271, 336 Charlemagne, 144–46 Chenu, Bruno, 2, 27n4, 27n8 Chenu, Marie-Dominique, 45 Chicago School, 137 christendom, 35, 39, 46, 95n2, 111, 113, 118, 141–48, 219, 351 christianization, 9, 39, 89, 110, 139– 148, 174, 193, 234–35, 256, 270, 289, 303, 331 Clément, Olivier, 79, 102n99 communism, 37, 42, 75, 93, 125, 127, 133, 158 community, 6, 21, 114, 125, 179n79, 195–97, 230, 260–61, 273, 307

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 382

Concordat, 44, 53, 72, 98n49 Concord of Leuenberg, 50 Congar, Yves-Marie-Joseph, 47 Conovici, Iuliana, 79, 101n92, 101n98 Conseil National des Évangéliques de France, 53 conversion, 5–6, 52, 54, 57, 98n49, 107, 143, 145–46, 164, 192, 196, 216, 274, 287, 296, 303, 315, 317, 346 Council of Europe, 35 Cullmann, Oscar, 109, 245n10, 295 cultural mandate, 207, 214, 218, 220, 230, 281 Daniel, Yvan, 46, 96n32, 110, 256, 259, 319n11, 320n17 Daniélou, Jean, 47 Davie, Grace, 58–68, 99nn64–78, 156–57, 182nn138–54, 320nn27–29, 321nn33–34, 348n2 Decalogue, 120, 211, 219, 275 dechristianization, 55–58, 89–91, 134, 140–42, 146–48 Declaration of the rights of man, 39 Delumeau, Jean, 142, 146, 148, 181nn108–109, 181n111, 181n123 desacralization, 140, 226–27, 321n48 Desroche, Henri, 140, 180n106 Dewitte, Jacques, 126–30, 179nn80–85 dialogue, 193, 287; interdisciplinary, 13, 21, 26, 136, 188; interreligious, 24, 112–13, 154, 210–14, 244, 272 Dilthey, Wilhelm, 223 Donegani, Jean-Marie, 17, 30n45, 31n58 Donzé, Marc, 17, 31n53 Drewermann, Eugen, 50 Dumézil, Bruno, 145, 181nn116–18 Durkheim, Émile, 65, 125, 179n79, 226–28 Ebeling, Gerhard, 223, 294–95, 324n73 ecclesiology, 100n83, 111–13, 148, 151, 257, 261, 290–92, 294–300, 324n66, 331–33 ecumenism, 51, 97n37, 112, 213

25-09-2021 09:27:50

Index

Edict of Nantes, 39 Ellul, Jacques, 167, 184n179, 231–32, 249n89, 250n101, 256, 319n11, 321n47, 323n56, 352 Enlightenment, 2, 10–12, 35, 116–19, 135, 155, 165, 190–92, 202, 227, 233, 278, 297, 342, 346 epistemology, 4, 12, 14, 16, 18–19, 24, 26, 137, 184n185 eschatology, 5, 23, 36, 147, 190–91, 216–17, 221, 225, 239–40, 243–244, 245n10, 262–67, 293–94, 306–308, 322n49, 329, 346 Eslin, Jean-Claude, 164, 183n171 esoterism, 57, 77, 88, 132–36, 274 ethics, 11, 15, 36, 66, 78, 117, 147, 161, 167–73, 189, 192–94, 198–204, 207– 11, 216–21, 231, 242–43, 247n41, 249n72, 258, 260–268, 272–73, 285–93, 307, 310, 324n65, 336, 345–46; social, 192–94, 243, 266, 286, 302–306, 345 ethnology, 8, 105 European Values Study, 56, 78, 131 evangelical, 7, 17, 50–51, 53–56, 59, 72, 74, 76–77, 80, 97n34, 104–106, 110, 113, 120, 142, 148, 154, 172, 176n23, 180n105, 190, 194, 229, 235, 243, 256, 257–61, 265–66, 271, 296, 317 Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, 80–82 evil, 158, 199, 202, 206–207, 211, 230, 232, 247n40, 283, 297, 346 extra nos, 209, 301 Fath, Sébastien, 29n22, 54–55, 98n51, 348n3 Fédération Évangélique de France, 53 Fédération nationale musulmane de France, 53 Fédération Protestante de France, 53 Feuerbach, Ludwig, 119 forgiveness, 199–209, 216, 267, 285, 298–301, 323n59, 330

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 383

383

Frégosi, Franck, 151, 182n136, 182n143 Freud, Sigmund, 119 Freytag, Walter, 176n25, 245n10, 295, 346, 349n19 Fridlund, Patrik, 212, 248n60 Gagnebin, Laurent, 16, 25, 31n52, 34n80 Gauchet, Marcel, 118, 177n46, 181n127 globalization, ix, 74, 121, 155, 157, 272, 279, 305, 334, 344 Godin, Henri, 46, 96n32, 110, 140, 176n18, 256, 259, 319n11, 320n17 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 168 Gog, Sorin, 78, 101n92, 101n96 Gräb, Wilhelm, 138, 180n102 grace, 159, 196, 200, 203–206, 209, 216–17, 221–22, 265–66, 294–95, 302–303 Gregory the Great, 142 Grellier, Isabelle, 11, 20, 30n34, 31n50, 31n62 Grenzgänger, 189 Gruehn, Werner, 137 Guillebaud, Jean-Claude, 167, 183n160, 184n179 Guiness, Os, 258 Günther, Wolfgang, 257, 320n15 Habermas, Jürgen, 160–61, 183nn157– 63, 304 Hafner, Johann E., 114, 177n33, 320n25 hamartiology, 207–208 Harrison, Peter, 147, 181n126 Hartenstein, Karl, 245n10, 295, 346, 349n19 Hauerwas, Stanley, 254, 319n1 healing, 3, 195, 197, 200, 205–206, 216, 230, 293, 297, 300, 304 hedonism, 297 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 119, 301 Heidegger, Martin, 166, 223 hell, 56–57, 132, 206 hermeneutics, 103, 138, 147, 175n12, 190, 196, 222–27, 259, 260, 268,

25-09-2021 09:27:50

384

Index

270, 277–84, 294–96, 301, 304, 311, 312, 317–19, 321n43, 330, 341 Hervieu-Léger, Danièle, 52, 57, 95n7, 96n21, 98n46, 99n59, 122–26, 141, 178n65, 179n76, 320n27 Hiebert, Paul, ix, 175n11, 231, 250n95 Hilbert, Gerhard, 259, 320n18 Hinduism, 55, 156, 233 Hitler, Adolf, 202 Hobhouse, Walter, 259 Holy Spirit. See pneumatology homiletics, 16, 33n80, 103 Huber, Wolfgang, 247n40, 301, 326n92, 335 Hume, David, 162 Husserl, Edmund, 129, 138, 180n103, 235, 248n65 iconoclasm, 170, 219 immanence, 10, 11, 125–26, 162, 197, 235–44, 261, 264–67, 305, 307, 318, 322, 330 immigration, 36, 43, 52–55, 59, 63–64, 90, 150–51, 154, 182n135, 271, 287, 334, 340–44, 349n12 incarnation, 9, 106–108, 133, 165, 170, 216, 222, 225, 294, 297 inculturation, 1, 9, 21, 105–108, 115, 175n6, 175n11, 176n13, 197, 254– 55, 319n9, 330 interdisciplinarity, ix–x, 2, 12–13, 20, 26–27, 136 internet, 167, 171, 347 intolerance. See tolerance Islam, 43, 52–53, 70, 75, 149, 151–57, 173, 182n142, 213, 247n39, 271–72, 278, 320n30, 339, 341–42, 348nn7– 8; Islamization, 151–52, 154 Jehovah’s Witnesses, 55–56, 70, 76 Jenkins, Philip, 99n73, 153–54, 181n130, 182nn137–44, 271, 320n28 Jesuits, 105–106 Jesus, ix, 5, 7, 22–23, 32–33, 106–107, 113, 121, 165, 191–97, 200–11,

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 384

215–38, 242, 250n105, 255, 264–66, 273–75, 278–87, 291–301, 309–17, 326n104 Jonas, Hans, 126, 128, 179n81 Joncheray, Jean, 19–20, 27, 30nn34–36, 31n62, 34n81 Judaism, 70, 75, 213, 227, 256, 315–16 Jugendweihe, 81–82, 85 Junge Gemeinde, 81 justification, 162, 164, 193, 195, 203– 205, 216–17, 221, 232, 258, 265, 294–95, 302, 308 Kähler, Martin, 32n67, 188, 245n4 Kant, Immanuel, 19, 160–61, 168, 237, 301 Kierkegaard, Sören A., 168–171, 184n184, 261, 320n20 Klopstock, Friedrich Gottlieb, 168 Kolakowski, Leszek, 126–29, 179nn83– 84, 248n65 Körtner, Ulrich H. J., 220–21, 249n79, 249n82 Kuhn, Thomas, 29n32, 110 Küng, Hans, 110 laicity, 43–44, 53, 96n18, 141, 148, 189, 195, 229, 243–44, 272, 304 Lambert, Yves, 30n39, 52, 57, 97n41, 98n45, 98n57, 99nn60–61, 102n113, 132–33, 179nn87–91, 180n98 Le Bras, Gabriel, 141 Ledure, Yves, 165, 184n174, 215 legitimation, 147, 214, 233, 261, 279, 290, 305 Le Goff, Jacques, 96n30, 142 Lenoir, Frédéric, 51, 97n41, 98n54 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim, 168 Leuba, Jean-Louis, 28n14, 296, 325n80 Lindbeck, Georg, 177n32, 254, 319n1 Lubac, Henri de, 47 Luckmann, Thomas, 178n68, 276, 321n38 Luhman, Niklas, 123–24, 178

25-09-2021 09:27:50

Index

Luther, Martin, 2, 27n9, 203–204, 294– 96, 303, 320n31, 325n79, 326n94, 327n108 Lutheran, 39, 48, 50, 53, 69–70, 75–80, 92, 98n56, 113, 146, 176n23, 195, 222, 335 Maritain, Jacques, 45 marriage, 49–51, 56, 61, 227 Marx, Karl, 82, 119, 125, 278 Mauss, Marcel, 105, 126 Mead, Margaret, 105 Meland, Bernard, 137 Merovingian, 144–45 Messiah, 5, 192, 298 metanarrative, 274, 278–80, 284–85, 290, 317, 247n50 metaphysics, 32n65, 161, 165–66, 237, 327n106 Methodism, 63, 67, 99n70, 109 methodology, 12, 19–21, 24, 51, 103, 123, 130, 180n103, 192, 236, 254, 331 Michelat, Guy, 97n40, 99nn60–63, 134–35, 180n95 Middle Ages, 116, 139, 142, 144, 151, 163, 219, 233, 256, 346 missio Dei, 6–7, 29nn17–21, 257, 264 missiology: aesthetic, 262–64, 280–82, 288, 310, 335; contextual, 3, 114, 120–21; critical and ambivalent, 284; empirical and hermeneutic, 254, 259–60, 268–69, 318; of hope, 265–72, 306; of the Word of God, 294, 330 mission: external and internal, 8, 351, 257, 274; Mission de France, 46–47; Mission de Paris, 46; “mission”, “Mission”, “missions”, 6–7 Moser, Félix, 103, 321n33 music, 218 Napoleon, 44, 55, 68, 98n49 National Socialism, 119, 202 Naudet, Paul, 259

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 385

385

Nemo, Philippe, 36–37, 95nn3–6, 147, 249n76, 326n101 New Age, 60, 88 Newbigin, Lesslie, ix–x, 2, 28n10, 108– 109, 116–17, 121–22, 176nn15–16, 177nn44–45, 178n59, 187, 189–195, 215, 238, 243, 245nn8–9, 246nn12– 30, 248n56, 263, 302, 327n107, 351–52 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 119, 162–68 nihilism, 168, 235, 308 Nobilli, Robert de, 105 Novalis, 276, 321n37 occult, 18, 88, 119 ontology, 127, 130, 170 Orthodox, 36–37, 39, 43, 55, 63, 68–79, 91–93, 95n5, 100n83, 156, 227, 271, 280, 337n2 Pace, Enzo, 123, 178n66 Pannenberg, Wolfhart, 237, 251n107 paranormal, 135 parasciences, 91, 94 Pascal, Blaise, 163–64, 183nn169–72, 302 Paschke, Boris, 293, 324n69 Pentecostal, 53–54, 63, 72, 76, 99n70, 120, 154, 271, 336 Pétain, Philippe, 45 phenomenology, 14, 128–29, 138–39, 180n103, 235–37, 248n65, 255, 302 pietism, 245n10, 248n67, 274, 295, 219 Plato, 168, 215, 233 Plotinus, 168 Polanyi, Michaël, 29n33, 158–59, 162, 183n155 Pollack, Detlef, 88–90, 102n104 Poulat, Émile, 18–20, 31n56, 32nn63– 65, 44, 95n9, 96nn23–25, 320n17 pragmatism, 164–65, 188 preaching, 13, 23, 103, 107, 146, 205, 222–23, 242, 293–95 psychoanalysis, 200 psychology, 15, 137

25-09-2021 09:27:50

386

Index

Radical Orthodoxy, 254, 303 rational choice, 123, 155 Ratzinger, Joseph, 161, 183n159 Ratzmann, Wolfgang, 14, 20, 24–26, 30n42, 33n78 reconciliation, 194, 199, 201, 204, 206, 297 redemption, 9, 143, 203–11, 254, 299, 301, 325n91 regeneration, 249n74, 301, 303 reincarnation, 56, 133–34 Rémond, René, 38, 42, 95n13, 96nn17– 19, 97n39 Ricci, Mateo, 105 Rorty, Richard, 164–65, 183n172 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 19 Russell, James C., 144, 181n115, 319n10 sacred, 59–60, 66, 129, 140, 179n79, 225–28, 239, 302, 346 Saint-Sernin, Bertrand, 159–60, 183n156, 215 salvation. See soteriology sanctification, 148, 180n105, 216–17, 224, 226, 228, 242, 249n73, 286–89, 296, 303, 307, 326n104, 329 Satan, 230, 282 Schillebeeckx, Edward, 31n51 Schiller, Friedrich, 168 Schlatter, Adolf, 237, 251n106, 255 Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst, 13, 116, 117, 177n26, 187, 222, 233, 248n67 Schweitzer, Albert, 190, 326n96 Schweyer, Stefan, 333, 337n5 Second World War, 42, 45, 60, 71, 73, 90, 305 Sellmann, Matthias, 112, 176n19, 177n20 Shenk, Wilbert R., 2, 28n12, 146, 176n20, 177n38, 193, 259, 320n19, 333, 337n6 Shoah, 202, 247n40 sin. See hamartiology social christianity, 305, 326n99

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 386

socialism, 44, 82, 119, 306, 326n99 soteriology: postmodern, 197, 209, 240, 250n96, 269, 330 suffering, 199–200, 202, 216, 246n34, 281, 286, 288, 294, 307–308, 323, 326n104 Spaemann, Robert, 163, 183n167 supply side, 78, 155 taboo, 110, 113, 119, 172, 179n79, 187, 202–203, 209, 230, 269–70, 301, 317, 325n91 Tanase, Laurentui D., 68, 71, 73–77, 100nn79–89 Teuffel, Jochen, 231–33, 250n97, 270– 72, 297, 319n2, 320n24, 321n32, 325n82 Thatcher, Margaret R., 60–61 Tiefensee, Eberhard, 276–77, 321n39 Tillich, Paul, 31n51, 47, 108, 116, 119, 175n10, 254, 321n36, 330 tolerance, 110, 113, 126, 135, 144, 151, 153, 193–94, 211–14 Tomka, Miklos, 91, 100nn91–93, 102nn110–13, 131–32, 176n66, 179n88, 180n93 transcendance. See immanence Trigano, Shmuel, 125–26, 130, 179nn70–77 Valadier, Paul, 158, 182n154, 183n164, 184n180 Van der Ven, Johannes A., 138 Vatican II, 47–49, 63, 256, 317 Vattimo, Gianni, 166–67, 184nn177–80, 276, 321n37, 327n106 vicarious religion, 67, 156, 271, 273, 348n2 Vincent, Gilbert, 95n1, 213, 248n62 Voicu, Malina, 78, 101n92 Von Balthasar, Hans Urs, 169n170, 171, 184nn186–88, 220 Walldorf, Friedemann, x, 2, 28n10, 108, 187

25-09-2021 09:27:50

Index

Warneck, Gustav, 8, 29nn24–25, 295, 351 Weber, Max, 95n8, 125, 140–41, 321n40 Weiss, Johannes, 190 Weltanschauung, 35, 134, 321n38 Werner, Karl Ferdinand, 95n1, 147 Wertheim, Margaret, 171, 185n191 Wessels, Anton, 142–43, 177n35, 181n113 Wetzel, Klaus, 150, 178n53, 181n131

Gantenbein_9781793633811.indb 387

387

Wichern, Johann Hinrich, 29n22 Willaime, Jean-Paul, 17, 31n55, 54, 95nn1–7, 98n50, 102n113, 179n79, 250n90 World Council of Churches, 51, 83, 106, 108–10, 176n14, 245n7, 317 World Value Study, 179n86 Zorn, Jean-François, 188, 195, 245n5, 246n18, 247n37, 248n59, 254, 321n41, 330, 353

25-09-2021 09:27:50