" ‘Coherent, Inclusive, Dialogical, Hospitable’: Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen’s Constructive Theological Method,” Anglican Theological Review 99 (2017): 101–10 (“Reviews in Depth” section)

A7W99.1 “Coherent, Inclusive, Dialogical, Hospitable”: Veli-Matti Karkkainens Constructive Theological Method Sc o t t Ma c D o uga l l * Christ and Reconciliation . By Veli-Matti Karkkainen. A Constructive Christian Theology for the Pluralistic World, vol. 1. Grand Rap­ ids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing, 2013. xiv + 453 pp. $40.00 (paper). Trinity and Revelation. By Veli-Matti Karkkainen. A Constructive Christian Theology for the Pluralistic World, vol. 2. Grand Rap­ ids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing, 2014. xii + 472 pp. $40.00 (paper). Creation and Humanity. By Veli-Matti Karkkainen. A Constructive Christian Theology for the Pluralistic World, vol. 3. Grand Rap­ ids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing, 2015. xix + 554 pp. $40.00 (paper). Spirit and Salvation. By Veli-Matti Karkkainen. A Constructive Chris­ tian Theology for the Pluralistic World, vol. 4. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing, 2016. xvii + 498 pp. $40.00 (paper). These four books are the first four volumes of a new five-volume systematic theology by the prolific theologian Veli-Matti Karkkainen. Karkkainen has been a professor of systematic theology at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, since 2000, and also has an appointment as docent of ecumenics at the University of Hel­ sinki in his native Finland. * Scott MacDougall is Visiting Assistant Professor of Theology at Church Divinity School of the Pacific in Berkeley, California. He is the author of More Than Com­ munion: Imagining an Eschatological Ecclesiology (T&T Clark, 2015). 101 102 Anglican Theological Review Christ and Reconciliation (volume 1) examines the person (part 1: “Christ”) and work (part 2: “Reconciliation”) of Jesus Christ, treat­ ing along the way such topics as the significance of Jesus’ earthly life; evolving conceptions of messiahship; the question of Christ’s preex­ istence; the relationship of Logos Christologies and Spirit Christologies; views of atonement and reconciliation; and their connection to Christian mission. Trinity and Revelation (volume 2) weaves together an approach to the doctrines of God, the Trinity, and revelation by developing theologies of “Triune Revelation” (part 1) and the “Triune God” (part 2), addressing such theological questions as the relation­ ship of revelation, history, and promise; the authority of scripture, tra­ dition, and community; natural theology; and approaches to speaking properly of God, including whether to enumerate divine attributes, within a framework that maintains God’s relationality, communality, and hospitality as Trinity. Creation and Humanity (volume 3) explores the world as God’s creation (part 1: “Creation”) and the human person as having a special role within it (part 2: “Humanity”), developing perspectives on such crucial matters as the importance of taking the sciences seriously in formulating doctrines of both creation and theological anthropology; cosmological and evolutionary perspectives as resources for theology; divine providence; the question of suffering and flourishing of life in general and of human life in particular; the uniqueness of the human person as created in imago Dei; and the nature of human nature. Un­ like far too many systematic theologies, Spirit and Salvation (volume 4) articulates a helpful and robust pneumatology (part 1: “Spirit”) and connects it directly to soteriology (part 2: “Salvation”), taking up such topics along the way as the deep connections between pneumatology and the doctrine of the triune God and between pneumatology and the doctrine of creation; the discernment of spirits at various levels (personal, social, political, cosmic); the character of salvation as expe­ rienced as gift and transformation; the question of justification; and the role salvation plays in effecting two related groups of phenomena: “healing, restoration, and empowerment” and “reconciliation, libera­ tion, and peacebuilding.” R will be more than clear from reviewing just this partial list of the topics treated thus far in Karkkainen’s systematics that space here will not permit a detailed look at the content of it. What can and ought to be accomplished is a closer look at his theological method. While Kiirkkainen advances more than a few important theological Ka r k k a in e n ’s Co n s t r u c t iv e Th e o l o g ic a l Me t hod 103 conversations by offering fresh perspectives on old problems (some of which are pointed out below), a case could be made that the most important contribution that his massive effort makes resides in his overall approach to the theological task. Defining two of the key terms in Karkkainen s name for the work as a whole begins to provide insight into his method, ffe calls his systematics A Constructive Christian Theology for the Pluralistic World. What he means by “constructive” and “pluralistic” is highly instruc­ tive with respect to characterizing his project. For Karkkainen, “con­ structive” is to be understood as synonymous with “systematic.” 1 They are not actually synonyms, however, since like most theologians who characterize their theologies as constructive rather than as system­ atic, he marks a distinction between a systematic approach to theol­ ogy that operates as if theological insights can be organized into neat and tidy systems without doing violence to the enterprise and a con­ structive impulse that seeks to build more complicated, textured, and forthrightly perspectival views.2 He champions the latter. Moreover, in Karkkainen’s estimation, the truth of what is delivered thereby is not demonstrated by adherence to the systematic principle that or­ ganizes, if not determines, what is offered, but by “coherence.” The particular coherence theory of truth that he employs, however, is not limited to connecting theological insights to one another within that single realm of discourse, resulting in an inward-looking “ghetto” fo­ cused solely on the church, a condition that he takes to be a significant limitation of the nonfoundationalism of the Yale School. Rather, it is one that maintains a coherence built across disparate areas of knowl­ edge, exemplifying a constructive postfoundationalism that Kark­ kainen wishes to extol.3 This approach connects directly to Karkkainen’s emphasis on pluralism. His method is pluralistic in at least three senses. First, consistent with his broad coherence theory of truth, it features a dis­ ciplinary pluralism. He uses the mathematical concept of transversality as a metaphor to describe the multidisciplinary, intersectional, embodied, and contextual character of knowledge, arguing that, as 1 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 13. 2 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 14. 3 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 10, 14. 104 Anglican Theological Review Thomas Aquinas thought, what is claimed theologically must cohere with knowledge more broadly.4 Second, Karkkainens approach to Christian theology itself is marked by an ecumenical and contextual pluralism. While he himself is rooted in the Pentecostal tradition, his theological viewpoint is thor­ oughly informed by deep and sustained engagement with theologians from a wide range of times, places, and locations on the Christian spectrum. Moreover, he is refreshingly aware that he, “as a middleaged European white male ,”5 has perspectival limitations stemming from his context, that such limitations mark us all no matter what our contexts, that all theology has a context, whether the theologian is will­ ing to admit that or not, and that, therefore, a constructive theology must engage theologies from as many contexts as possible.6 While this means taking seriously voices that have often been marginalized— “female theologians of various agendas such as feminist, womanist, and mujerista; women from Africa, Asia, and Latin America; other liberationists, including black theologians of the USA and sociopo­ litical theologians from South America, South Africa, and Asia; and postcolonialists”7—it does not mean wholesale acceptance of them. The wide diversity of theological views, put into conversation with one another and with Christian tradition, certainly shifts understand­ ing but may not completely revise it. Karkkainen notes, presciently, As a result—if I may put it somewhat daringly—should my approach to constructive theology be successful according to my own standards, the “traditionalists” would find my way of doing theology much too open to new voices, dialogue part­ ners, and sets of issues, while “progressives” might lament that my proposal is still too much stuck with Christian tradi­ tion, both biblical and historical!8 Neither does it mean that Karkkainen does not have preferred inter­ locutors. Generally speaking, Wolfhart Pannenberg and Jurgen Moltmann are the two theologians to whose work Karkkainen returns 4 5 6 ' 8 Karkkainen, Creation and Humanity, 3-4. Karkkainen, Spirit and Salvation, 3. Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 16-21. Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, xi-xii. Karkkainen, Trinity and Revelation, 6. K a r k k a i n e n ’s C o n s t r u c t i v e T h e o l o g i c a l M e t h o d 105 again and again w hile form ulating his own proposals throughout the four volum es. H e also often lifts up certain voices w here particular topics are concerned. F o r exam ple, Elizabeth Johnson, “the m oderate Catholic fem inist,”9 is frequently a go-to figure w hen a fem inist voice is needed. O n the person o f Christ, the biblical scholar N. T. W right looms large. W here a postfoundationalist approach to canonical m ethod in theology is engaged, Kevin J. V anhoozer s work is accented. N one of this, of course, im pugns th e im portance of K arkkainens stated goal o f treating often sidelined perspectives as “equal conversa­ tion p artn ers,”10 w hich he does, particularly am ong liberationist th eo ­ logians. His ecum enical and contextual pluralism is crucial to the strength and value o f his project. Third, extending ecum enical and contextual pluralism further, K arkkainens constructive theology attends to th e reality o f religions pluralism. It does this in th ree modes: (1) com parative religion, which seeks to describe and com pare the features o f religions; (2) C hristian theology o f religions, w hich is a theological exam ination of the role th at non-C hristian religions play in G od’s economy; and (3) com para­ tive theology, w hich investigates discrete topics or concepts across two or m ore religions w ith an eye tow ard understanding the extent to w hich they are understood and practiced similarly in each tradition. O f the three, K arkkainens em phasis is on the latter, the approach of com parative theology.* 11 This is a distinctive com ponent o f his theolog­ ical m ethod, one th at receives a great deal o f detailed and sustained attention. Karkkainen returns to the com parative theological exercise at regular intervals, investigating in d epth how the theological m atter being treated functions in o th er faiths (lim ited alm ost exclusively to Judaism , Islam, H induism , and Buddhism ), and som etim es how other faiths view particular aspects o f C hristianity (for example, the Jewish understanding o f C hristian ideas o f m essianism or Islam ic perspec­ tives on C hristian trinitarian theology). Again and again, Karkkainen rem inds us that the goal is not to advance a facile type of theological religious pluralism , one positing that all religions are essentially and ultim ately the same. (Karkkainen devotes an entire chapter in volum e 2 to “T he Failing Prom ises o f T/mo-Logical Pluralism s” th at fully d e­ velops this view.) Rather, sensitivity to the integrity and complexity 9 Karkkainen, Creation and Humanity, 225. 10 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, xii. 11 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 21-29. 106 Anglican Theological Review of other faiths, as well as our own, helps us to see more clearly how each is different, unique, and particular, and allows us to dialogue across these differences in a spirit of confidence and hospitality. En­ gaging religious pluralism via comparative theology, it seems, does not so much reveal how Christianity and other faiths are “essentially” the same or different, but how much they are simply themselves and are to be honored as such. Karkkainens contention is that there is much to be learned by doing this. These three pluralisms—disciplinary, ecumenical/contextual, and religious—each make crucial contributions to Karkkainens overall method, which requires engaging this breadth of knowledge in pursu­ ing theological coherence and truth. Constructive theology is, there­ fore, an “integrative” discipline. In order to build a coherent “web” that incorporates more than solely theological concerns by taking the wider world directly into account, it must interact meaningfully with not only “biblical studies, church history and historical theology, phil­ osophical theology, . . . [and] ministerial studies,” and not only with “religious studies, ethics, and missiology,” but also with “nontheological and nonreligious fields such as natural sciences, cultural studies, and . . . the study of living faiths.”12 This is the tack Karkkainen takes throughout the four volumes, to great effect, both in terms of his handling of the individual theological loci and the overall cumulative impact. For example, in framing his theological presentation of the doctrine of creation, Karkkainen notes that it will need to include: (1) reexamination of scripture and doctrinal history to recover an ear­ lier non-duality between “nature” and “person”; (2) theological reaf­ firmation that to speak of the creation is to speak of the Creator who is a relational communion (as established in the preceding volume); (3) scriptural and theological attestation that creation cannot be un­ derstood rightly without a proper understanding of its eschatological destiny; (4) detailed, substantive, and sustained engagement with the natural sciences; (5) attention to ecumenical voices and theological perspectives from various confessional and doctrinal locations; and (6) careful consideration of the creation stories of the living faiths.13 In Karkkainens estimation, this provides a theologically rich view of creation that coheres with what he has already argued and will argue subsequently, and that accords with not only theological, Christian, or 12 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 13. 13 Karkkainen, Creation and Humanity, 9-11. Ka r k k a i n e n ’s Co n s t r u c t iv e Th e o l o g ic a l Me t ho d 107 even religious knowledge alone, but also our best understanding of the realities that constitute the world, as broadly construed as possible. For Karkkainen, there is no other way to do theology in what he calls our “ ‘post-’ world,”14 a world that is “postmodern, postfoundationalist, poststructuralist, postcolonial, postmetaphysical, postpropositional, postliberal, postconservative, postsecular, post-Christian, post-?”15 To be convincing, theology undertaken in such a context requires a constructive method suited to its concerns and tempera­ ment. To be truthful, it must also not shy away from critically resisting its context, where necessary. Karkkainen’s working definition of his method reflects this tension. Systematic/constructive theology is an integrative discipline that continuously searches for a coherent, balanced under­ standing of Christian truth and faith in light of Christian tra­ dition (biblical and historical) and in the context of historical and contemporary thought, cultures, and living faiths. It aims at a coherent, inclusive, dialogical, and hospitable vision.16 Similarly to the way in which his engagement with marginalized theo­ logical voices was seen to be somewhat ambivalent, taking them seri­ ously on the one hand but not uncritically on the other, Karkkainen’s method allows him to take the “ ‘post-’ world” seriously without neces­ sarily requiring him to assent fully to it. In his initial programmatic chapter on method at the beginning of volume 1 (which is summarized in a very abbreviated form at the be­ ginning of each volume), Karkkainen writes that “this series continues developing ‘theological method’ incrementally, step by step, as part of the material presentation of various themes and issues.”1. It is not en­ tirely clear what he means by this, since this idea is repeated in all of the introductory chapters in each volume, yet the method itself does not appear to develop in any appreciable manner from one volume to the next. The method is applied in volume 4 just as it was articulated at the start of volume 1. If, however, what he means by “development” is that the theological implications carried in the method become 14 Karkkainen, Spirit and Salvation, 3. 15 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 1. 16 Karkkainen, Trinity and Revelation, 2. 11 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 4. 108 Anglican Theological Review increasingly evident and more robust as the exploration unfolds, then this is certainly the case. The overarching theological viewpoint deliv­ ered by application of his method definitely develops as the topics in his constructive theology are addressed. To trace just one example, Karkkainen argues in volume 2, as part of his treatment of the “Triune God,” for a position he calls “classical panentheism.” In this chapter, he deploys a sophisticated analysis of the scriptural, patristic, medieval, and modern theological legacies to argue that, far from being a contemporary emergence, panentheism is a view with a deep root in Christian biblical and theological tradition. If, Karkkainen argues, this classical strand of panentheistic thought— one that balances properly Gods transcendence and immanence, rather than sliding too far toward immanence, as he holds Schleiermacher, for instance, to have done—it can be a mediating position be­ tween the hyper-transcendent extreme end of some forms of classical theism, on the one hand, and overly immanent forms of panentheism (as in types of process thought, for example), on the other, in a way that accords well with both the sensibilities of our time and Christian tradition. In volume 3, Karkkainen develops this notion of classical panentheism in his thinking about divine action. There, Karkkainen makes the case that holding a classically panentheistic view of God affirms God as continual creator (transcendence) and constant pre­ server (immanence) of creation, one who allows creation its proper autonomy while still remaining present, active, and involved in the worlds processes, in and through both their regularities and indeterminacies, an argument worked out in conversation with quantum and chaos theories, among other scientific contributions. In volume 4, where Karkkainen is elucidating a component of his doctrine of the Holy Spirit, he acknowledges that neither of the foregoing claims could be made without a robust trinitarian doctrine of God that, in accordance with both traditional and emerging feminist theologies, and consonant with developing cosmological science, understands the Spirit to be the life-giving and life-sustaining immanence of the God who, while remaining transcendent, nevertheless indwells and per­ meates the whole of creation. The unfolding of the interconnected logic of this position, which develops over the course of three volumes, demonstrates the effec­ tiveness of Karkkainen s method. I have had to move too quickly over its particulars here to make the case fully. Even so, I hope it is clear that, while the method itself has not changed, its implications have Ka r k k a in e n ’s Co n s t r u c t iv e Th e o l o g ic a l Me t hod 109 become more evident. We can see at each step a balance between tradition and contemporary context and engagement with a variety of conversation partners from diverse sectors (including other religions, which were not mentioned here, though Karkkainen clarifies these positions with reference to them). And, as each step builds on the previous and leads to the next, the overall effectiveness of the method in constructing a viable theology for the “‘post-’ world” becomes in­ creasingly visible. This only makes good sense, for several reasons. Karkkainen s co­ herence theory of truth demands it, for one thing. For another, he seeks not only coherence but to evaluate the truth claims of theo­ logical propositions in a way that, in his view, many nonfoundationalists and the Radically Orthodox shy away from doing, as they both generally accept traditional theological propositions as intrasystemic “rules” for the faith without much further ado. In making his case for the interconnected conceptions of classical panentheism, a robust but preliminary conception of divine action, and a full articulation of pneumatology, Karkkainen tests his theological views against not only scripture and tradition, but the insights of the natural sciences into the conditions of creation and of other faiths on similar issues, arriving at conclusions that are appropriate to our time and place and that are also persuasive rather than doctrinaire. 18 As Karkkainen un­ derstands it, truth can only convince, it cannot demonstrate with the certainty of proof. This is because truth is an eschatological reality. 19 While knowledge and history are still ongoing, unfinished processes, truth is something we need to claim humbly and hospitably, as we can and will be limited by our finite perspectives and our theologies will always stand in need of revision. The suggestive, searching, and sincere tone of Karkkainen’s important work exemplifies the wisdom of this method and of taking this approach. These are books of technical, academic theology that are best engaged by readers with a working knowledge of the terms, concepts, figures, and movements of the Christian theological heritage. They could be used with great profit in advanced seminars on specific theo­ logical topics such as Christology or Trinity or soteriology. I await the final volume of Karkkainen’s systematic/constructive theology, Community and Hope, with great anticipation. This is not 18 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 33. 19 Karkkainen, Christ and Reconciliation, 9, 15. 110 Anglican Theological Review only because my own work is situated at the nexus of church and es­ chatology, the two themes of the final volume, but also because it will be a great pleasure to observe and learn from how Karkkainen brings the ideas he has been developing over the course of the first four books to conclusion. Given what he has produced so far, it is a good bet that there are not only more provocative ideas coming but even more evidence that Karkkainen s constructive method deserves to become a noted and influential one. Copyright of Anglican Theological Review is the property of Anglican Theological Review Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.