Koopman, NN
University of Stellenbosch

For God so loved the world … Some contours for Public Theology in South Africa1

ABSTRACT

After a brief autobiographical outline of the author’s involvement in public theology, this article argues in favour of a critical and constructive public theology, which reflects upon the role of Christian faith in public life in the young South African democracy and in other democratic societies. It offers some crucial contours for the development of public theology. It firstly calls attention to different approaches to and emphases in public theology. With different emphases and methodologies the three central questions of public theology regarding the inherent public nature of God’s love for the world, the public rationality of this love, and the public implications of God’s love for the world, are addressed. Public theology is secondly described as an intra-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary and transdisciplinary scholarly practice. In the formulation of a third contour the possibilities of what Public theology might become are discussed, namely a theological discipline, subdiscipline, research field, curriculum organiser, catalyst or a new contextual theology. In two final sections the publics of public theology and the contemporary agenda of public theology are discussed.

Introduction

A professorial inaugural address speaks to colleagues, family and friends outside the field of technical, formal, scientific theology. One is supposed to tell these brothers and sisters in academic life, church life and broader society what you are doing as theologian. You specifically need to tell them what your professorial chair entails, how you understand your task and what your vision is for your research, teaching and community interaction. In my case I should to speak about the field of public theology as it is practised by a systematic theologian, specifically by a Christian ethicist, by what the doyen of Christian ethicists, James Gustafson of the University of Chicago, calls a systematic theological ethicist.2

I will embark on this task in a narrative and biographical manner, from childhood to where I currently find myself.

1. A story of informal public theology

It may not be pretentious to state that right through my life I have been exposed to and engaged in what has since 1974 been called public theology.3 During my childhood and youth I was exposed to the so-called informal public theological discourse of my parents, family, friends, local church communities and local neighbourhoods. In informal and sometimes in structured non-formal ways, these people reflected on the contents of God’s love for the world, and they continuously strove to discern what God’s love meant for their daily problems and challenges, sorrows and plights, dreams and joys. These people lived with faith in the triune God of perfect love for the whole cosmos. And they reflected on the meaning of that faith for all facets of their lives, from the intimately personal to the broadest public spheres of life.

They practised public theology when they dealt with the public challenge of illness, suffering and death. They would then pose the question what faith in the triune God of perfect love entails when you lose your grandma just when you have completed your teacher education programme and just when you have looked forward to repay her in some small way for the sacrificial investments that she has made in your life; and when you lose your husband in the first year of your marriage and when you lose the son born out of this marriage just when he has completed his training as an artisan and just when he has embarked on a promising career.

These people of my childhood and youth practised public theology when they dealt with the dehumanising impact of the apartheid system on their daily lives. They then reflected on the meaning of faith in a loving God when macro-apartheid measures determined their population group, areas of residence and the neighbourhood in which they were allowed to live and what colour people they could and could not marry or have a love relationship with. What does faith in the God who loves the world so much mean when various micro-apartheid measures dehumanise you, such as the notice boards at beautiful Strand Beach that have read Whites only and No dogs allowed, respectively?

And these people reflected on the meaning of faith in the triune God when Nelson Mandela was released and when we then faced the challenge to move from the old South Africa of diverse and apart to the new South Africa of diverse and together, from the old of enmity to the new of friendship, from the old of injustice to the new of justice for all, from the old of dehumanisation to the new of dignity, from the old of racism to the new of nonracialism, from the old of classism to the new of equity and equilibrium, from the old of sexism to the new of gender justice and partnership, from the old of homophobia to the new of embracement of the other, from the old of ageism, handicappism, xenophobia and ecocide to the new of hospitality to all age groups, to abled and differently abled people and to other nationalities, and from the old of ecocide to the new of communion and solidarity between the human and nonhuman parts of creation.

These people reflected on the meaning of faith in the triune God when they realised that in a pluralistic, democratic society the old ethos of uniformity at every cost and nontolerance of alternative views does not suffice but that new ways of dealing with plurality and ambiguity need to be explored. These people did public theology when they realised that the meaning of God’s love for this world cannot merely be described in theological language of vision and criticism but that new ways to engage with public life from the perspective of faith in the triune God of love need to be formulated. New ways of engaging with a complex public in the context of democratisation, Africanisation and globalisation have to be found.

2. A story of formal public theology

The agenda of my formal, academic and scholarly labour in public theology was informed by the informal public theological discourse that I have just sketched briefly. These informal and nonformal modes of public theology impact on my formal, scholarly reflection on the contents, rationality and public implications of God’s love for the world.

My master’s studies investigated the theme of God and suffering. In conversation with the work of Dutch theologian A van de Beek, a Trinitarian approach to suffering was constructed. It argued that in Jesus Christ the loving Father makes a choice against suffering. The Holy Spirit is the One who actualises this choice of the Father. Humans are called to participate, through prayers (of lament and protest) and through concrete public action, in the work of the Spirit to actualise the redemptive choice of the Father.4

My doctoral research reflected on two major approaches to Christian ethics, namely the so-called modern (in the sense of liberal) and post-modern (in the sense of postliberal). The study concluded that both approaches are required and complement each other, since Christian ethics does not only reflect on right and appropriate behaviour, conduct, choices and policies in a pluralistic, democratic society (an emphasis of the liberal approach to ethics) but it firstly contributes to the creation and sustenance of the vision of a good society and the embodiment of that vision in persons of virtue and character (an emphasis of the postliberal approach to morality). My doctoral study verified and confirmed the hypothesis that a society of dignity is enhanced through an inclusive ethics of vision, virtue and choices.5

My research since the completion of the doctoral project has been built around the insights of my master’s and doctoral work and around the development of three research projects, namely Theological Anthropology and Public Morality, Public Theology as Prophetic Theology, and Christology and Public Life in South Africa.

The anthropology project constructed a theological anthropology of relationality, vulnerability and interdependence that is mainly based on so-called economic Trinitarian thinking. This does not mean that the potential of immanent Trinitarian thinking for theological anthropology is underestimated. Its emphasis on relationality, vulnerability and interdependence within the Trinity is of lasting significance for anthropological thinking. The finding was, however, that economic Trinitarian thinking is less susceptible to speculative thinking than immanent Trinitarian thinking. Moreover, an anthropology that is based on economic Trinitarian thinking can draw insights from the magnalia Dei, in other words from God’s work of perfect love among humans and the rest of creation and from the rich tradition of theological reflection on this work. The meaning of this theological anthropology of relationality, vulnerability, interdependence and resilient hope was discussed with regard to concrete public challenges, like differently abled persons, gender relations, ubuntu discourses, social identity, human dignity and violence.6

The Public Theology as Prophetic Theology project argued that the prophetic mode is one of the ways in which Christian theology can engage with public life. In the context of a democracy, however, prophetic speaking needs to be redefined. While prophetic speaking is normally associated mainly with the offering of public criticism and to a lesser extent with offering a vision for public life, this research project argued that prophetic speaking should be broadened to include the sharing of stories of suffering and hope, the technical analysis of public challenges and the participation of churches and theologians in policy-making, policy-implementation and policy-monitoring processes. This broadened understanding of prophetic engagement entails that churches and theology contribute to a larger extent to the formation of public opinion as well. Appropriate interdisciplinary work constitutes an indispensable part of this broadened understanding of prophetic discourse. Over many years this broadened understanding of public theology as prophetic theology has led to engagement with many specific public issues, including reconciliation, justice, human dignity, poverty, violence and others.7

The Christology and Public Life project is the most recent project that I have embarked on. In line with my basic quest to reflect on the meaning of Trinitarian faith for public life, I intend to focus consecutively over the coming years on the construction of a public Christology, a public pneumatology and thereafter a public theology (in the sense of a doctrine of God).

Various postgraduate students have completed related research and others are working on themes relating to these research projects.8

This brief overview of my research in the field of public theology hopefully reveals the central and consistent questions, hypotheses, themes, categories and aims of my research vision and work, which entail the following: Trinitarian faith establishes, confirms and actualises a life of dignity for all in all walks of life (overarching vision); Trinitarian faith facilitates a constructive engagement with suffering (master’s studies); Trinitarian faith enhances the construction of a comprehensive public ethic that entails a vision of the good society of worth and dignity and the fulfilment of that vision through people of public virtue and character who make and live out good choices and policies (doctoral studies); Trinitarian faith paves the way for the construction of an anthropology of relationality, vulnerability and interdependence that fosters the actualisation of dignity in all walks of life, amongst others through the building of a human rights culture (Theological Anthropology and Public Morality project); and Trinitarian faith, through the church in its various forms and with its various partnerships, engages with public life in a prophetic manner, which includes envisioning, criticism, story-telling, technical analysis of public challenges, policy making and also formation of public opinion (Public Theology as Prophetic Theology project). To develop a richer understanding of the meaning of Trinitarian faith for the actualisation of dignity in public life, the doctrines of Christ, of the Spirit and of God are all full of potential. My immediate research vision mainly sets two aims: firstly to investigate the significance of Christian convictions, specifically of Trinitarian faith, for the building of a good society, in other words for the establishment, confirmation and actualisation of dignity in all walks of life in a context of various forms of the violation of human dignity and the dignity of the rest of creation, and secondly to investigate appropriate modes of Christian engagement with public life in the context of a pluralistic, democratic society, in other words to find appropriate ways to engage with various violations of dignity in pluralistic public life from the perspective of dignifying, humanising Christian faith. A crucial part of this engagement entails dialogue and collaboration with other academic disciplines. These two aims constitute the thread, parameters and coherency for all my research endeavours.

3. Some contours for public theology

My ongoing reflection on the triune God who loves the world so much has offered some concrete contours for the development of theories and models of public theology. I briefly mention five of them.

3.1 Public theology. More than one approach?

Public theology reflects on the love of the triune God for the world. This love is expressed in the magnalia Dei, in other words in the acts of creation, sustenance, care, election and calling of God the Father/Mother/Parent, in the acts of reconciliation, salvation and liberation of God the Son and in the acts of renewal, fulfilment and perfection of God the Spirit. This triune work establishes, confirms and actualises the dignity and worth of all humans and of the rest of creation. God’s love for the world, which comes to expression in the magnalia Dei, does have meaning, significance and implications for all dimensions and terrains of life, from the most private, personal and intimate to the most public, open, social and cosmic. At its heart, therefore, Christian theology is public theology. It reflects on the love of the God who is at work in all spheres of life. And the caring, liberating and renewing work of the triune God does have dignifying implications for the whole of creation, for all of reality.

It may be helpful to identify three basic questions in the field of public theology. These three questions investigate, firstly, the inherent public nature of God’s love, secondly, the rationality of God’s love for the world and, thirdly, the meaning and implications of God’s love for every facet of life. These three questions are a specification and concretisation of the three questions that Christian theology address, namely the questions regarding the contents of Christian faith, the rationality of Christian faith and the meaning and implications of Christian faith for all facets of life.

Different approaches to or types of theology address these three questions in different ways and with different emphases. Some years ago an influential theologian from Yale, Hans Frei, identified five types of theology. He argues that these theologies differ with regard to how they describe the theological task. But although these types of theology differ, they do have one thing in common: They reflect on Christian faith. According to Frei some theologians, such as Harvard scholar Gordon Kaufman, reflect on Christian faith from an external scholarly, academic and philosophical perspective with no room for the self-description that the Christian community offers regarding its faith. In this perspective Christian faith is one of the many religious traditions that help to constitute the public cultural heritage. Theology in this mode adheres to scientific criteria of meaningfulness, coherency, logic and universality.9

At the other extreme theology is done solely from the perspective of internal self-description by the community of faith. Here there is no room for the external scientific perspective on faith. External scientific criteria are not adhered to. Religious concepts should be examined in the contexts from which they derive their meaning. Frei cites DZ Phillips, philosopher of religion of the University of Wales, as a representative of this position.10

The other three positions are located between these two extremes. They give attention to both the external and internal descriptions of faith. Chicago scholar David Tracy attends to both but emphasises the external, academic description.11 The famous Swiss theologian Karl Barth, perhaps the most influential Protestant theologian of the 20th century, also attends to both approaches but gives priority to the internal self-description.12 The very influential Protestant theologian of Berlin, Friedrich Schleiermacher, is portrayed as occupying the central position, which entails a correlation of theology as both academic scientific enterprise and Christian self-description.13

So, although these approaches to theology14 differ and in some instances even contradict each other, they share the quest to address the three main sets of questions regarding Christian faith. Although different questions might be emphasised and prioritised these scholars indeed do give attention to the two questions that they do not address explicitly. Some of them give priority to the question regarding the contents of Christian faith (Barth). Others would emphasise the rationality of Christian faith (Tracy). The third question regarding the implications of Christian faith might be the priority for others. Since the 1960’s various Political and Liberation theologies enhanced the attention to the third set of questions regarding the meaning and implications of Christian faith for all walks of life.

Various theologians who emphasise any of these three questions describe their work as public theology. The emphasis of Princeton theologian and South African, Wentzel van Huyssteen, for instance, is on the second set of questions regarding the rationality of Christian faith. This work he describes as public theology. Van Huyssteen states, “… these essays also reflect my deepest conviction that only a truly accessible and philosophically credible notion of interdisciplinarity will be able to pave the way for a plausible public theology that wishes to play an important intellectual role in our fragmented culture today.”15 Other theologians, such as Dan Migliore16, also of Princeton Theological Seminary, focus on the first set of questions regarding the contents of Christian faith. They strive to illuminate the inherent public nature of that faith. They are also doing public theology.

3.2 Public theology: An intradisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approach?

Public theology is practised in an intradisciplinary way. All theological disciplines address the three questions regarding the contents, rationality and implications of Christian faith or, in the words of this article, the contents, rationality and implications of the Trinitarian love of God. In addressing the three sets of questions different theological disciplines emphasise some of these questions more than others, employ different methodologies, are guided by different outcomes and goals and use different languages. Yet, despite these differences they have all of these questions in focus.

All theological disciplines focus on Christian faith, specifically on the threefold question regarding this faith in the triune God of love proposed here. Though various theological disciplines reflect the diversity, richness and even complexity of the broader theological endeavour, there is throughout no doubt that theology is one united, integrated undertaking. This unity is witnessed to in the long historical development of theology into different disciplines. The historic and contemporary descriptions of the task of the various theological disciplines also affirm the unity of theology. The common sources that the various types of theology as well as the various theological disciplines use also witness to the unity in diversity of theology and specifically to its task of reflecting on Christian faith. This is more so the case if one assumes that all theologians of all the theological disciplines are at a deeper level engaged with the contents of faith and not only with reflection on the body of literature within their disciplines.

In his widely acclaimed book on the philosophy of theology Wolfhart Pannenberg, one of the most influential German and Lutheran theologians of the twentieth century,17 argues in favour of the unity and integrity of the theological disciplines. His point is that a thorough orientation regarding the historical development of the disciplines and the tasks ascribed to them and consideration of the contexts in which and reasons why these disciplines have developed would help contemporary theologians to develop fresh and creative understandings of these disciplines today. By investigating the development of theological disciplines in different historical periods he demonstrates the unity and integrity of the theological disciplines.

Theology in the early church, according to Pannenberg, focused on the interpretation of Scripture. Systematic theology and biblical scholarship were not separated. Theologians such as Origen viewed themselves as biblical theologians.18

In the Middle Ages biblical scholarship and systematic theology, in other words biblical theology, were complemented with commentaries, didactic and occasional writings as well as collections of the sayings of the Church Fathers. Since the period of scholasticism in the 12th century, these writings, sententiae, of the Fathers have lost their connection with Scripture and have been investigated systematically by means of the new dialectic approach of scholasticism. This shift to the systematic relevance of the material in Scripture and the patristic tradition paved the way for the growth of systematic theology as an autonomous discipline.19

During the Reformation attempts were made to bring systematic and biblical theology closer again, but the thrust towards separation was strong. Not only did systematic theology and biblical theology became more independent, but under the influence of Enlightenment thinking biblical theology separated into Old and New Testament studies.

Under influence of Schleiermacher practical theology was recognised as a separate academic discipline at the end of the 18th century at the Humboldt University in Berlin.20 Schleiermacher divided theology into three disciplines: Philosophical theology reflects the scientific character of theology by setting out the essence of Christianity as a particular form of belief and as the corresponding form of the Christian community. Practical theology deals with the technique of church and community leadership and is divided into various subdisciplines. Between these two is historical theology, which consists of exegetical theology, dogmatics and ‘ecclesial statistics’. The latter is a description of the present state of Christianity in so far as this is a result of its history.21 The distinctions of Schleiermacher are employed and revisited and amended and subdivided and extended in contemporary theological discourses and education programmes.

Pannenberg argues in favour of the unity of these theological disciplines. The unity of theology resides primarily in the internal continuity between the disciplines, which rests in the nature of Christian faith as a historic whole. The unified, holistic nature of Christian faith constitutes the unity of theology.22 In a very important study on the nature of theology a scholar of Vanderbilt Divinity School, Edward Farley, supports this second notion of material unity. He also reminds us of Schleiermacher’s second motivation of the unity of theology, namely its teleological unity, in other words its purpose to train people for ministry. Farley pleads that the unity in diversity of theology be acknowledged consistently. The notion of discipline should not be employed to fragmentise theology. He suggests that the concept of catalogue rather be employed to signify the uses of various theological disciplines and subdisciplines for educational purposes.23

This brief overview of the historical development of theological disciplines illumines the character of theology as a field that is united in its diversity.

A cursory survey of the task of the theological disciplines demonstrates how all theological disciplines in a variety of ways, with different emphases and methodologies, address the three questions regarding the contents, rationality and public implications of God’s Trinitarian love for the world.

Old and New Testament scholarship studies Scripture as one of the sources of the Christian faith tradition and uses appropriate methodological rules.24 The Old and New Testament that is studied by biblical scholars is the primary witness to the work and word of God.25 Biblical scholarship helps Christian theology in its wrestling with the identity and significance of Jesus Christ by wrestling with the text that transmits knowledge of Him and that indicates that Christianity has its historical grounding in both the histories of Israel and the living, crucified and resurrected Jesus Christ.26

Systematic theology, including dogmatics, ethics and philosophy of religion, investigates the contents of Christian faith as it is articulated in Scripture and in the Christian tradition.27 Systematic theology aims to map out the salvation of God in a well-rounded system. This system is, however, eschatological in nature. The best that fallible humans can do is to practise theologia viatorum (wayfarers’ theology), in other words to clarify in part, to live with vacuums, break-offs and inconsistencies but also to reach for the unattainable, namely the unity of knowledge, the unity of God’s work, which mirrors the unity of God. To do systematic work is to analyse, to take elements apart and also to synthetise, to put together in an orderly, systematic way. From this work of analysing and synthetising, in other words scientific work, intellectual clarity arises.28

On the basis of the methods of the historical sciences Church history describes the development of the Christian faith tradition since its inception until today and also illumines its development in the framework of broader historical developments.29 It traces the many ways in which Christian faith and life have come to expression in different times and places.30 Church history, or historical theology, illumines the historical contexts within which theological formulations were made. By emphasising this historical situatedness of theological formulations, historical theology teaches us that theology is not a static discipline but that it is alive and dynamic. Mistakes can be made, which implies that theological formulations call for critical scrutiny, amendment and transformation.31

Practical theology, which is subdivided into various subdisciplines, reflects on the practices that facilitate reception of and sharing in the extensive salvation that Christians proclaim.32 These practices are, amongst others, preaching, educating, pastoral counselling, caring for the poor the sick, dying and bereaved.33 Mission and evangelism could also be included under these practices.

Some scholars offer more distinctions with regard to various theological disciplines, for example philosophical theology and mystical theology/spirituality.34

This brief description of the task of the theological disciplines demonstrates that all these disciplines in various ways address the three sets of questions regarding Christian faith.35

Public theology is not only done in an intradisciplinary way but it is also an interdisciplinary endeavour. David Tracy36 describes the academy as that public or social location of theology where serious, critical scientific enquiry takes place with other academic disciplines. In its engagement with the academy theology is challenged to provide arguments that all reasonable people from diverse religious and secular traditions can recognise as reasonable. In this discourse appeals are made to universal faculties such as experience, intelligence, rationality and responsibility. Claims are stated with appropriate warrants, backings and rebuttal procedures. Tracy also pleads that although theologians confess allegiance to a specific religious tradition or to a praxis movement bearing religious significance, they abstract themselves from these faith commitments for the sake of critical analysis of religious and theological claims by outsiders and by those who belong to the tradition. There are, of course, many theologians who would oppose Tracy on this point. They would namely argue that you need not abstract and distance yourself from your faith commitments in order to do critical and honest introspection into the cognitive claims of your tradition. Such a withdrawal for the sake of honest scientific enquiry is viewed as being dishonest.

With an appeal to Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm theories, Dutch systematic theologian Gijsbert van den Brink,37 for instance, supports the later developments in the philosophy of science discourse, which makes room for adherence to particularistic commitments in the scientific endeavour. Although he reckons that there is something to be learned from older important philosophies of science,38 it remains his conviction that these approaches do not by far take the significant and determinative particularistic influences such as faith commitments of scientists seriously enough.

In the encounter with the academy public theology makes the choice for scientific reflection, for making faith convictions rationally accessible to all reasonable people as far as possible, for constructing arguments that pass the test of coherency, consistency and logic reasoning. Theology, however, does not have to distance itself from its faith commitments but takes care that such commitments do not exclude scientific scrutiny. The age-old Christian notion of fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding) that Anselm of Canterbury (1033 – 1109 AD) needs fresh application in this dialogue of theology with the academic public.

Transdisciplinarity discourse provides one more way of describing the manner in which public theological discourse can develop. Transdisciplinarity refers to the attempt to solve complex public problems from the local to global levels by drinking from the diversity of knowledge, insights and perspectives of various academic disciplines, practitioners and members of various sectors of public life. The expertise of every discipline and sector is respected, but disciplinary and sectorial boundaries are destabilised. Dualisms and even incommensuralibilities between, for instance, the secular and religious, the human and the natural sciences are challenged. The goal of the joint reflection is not only to understand challenges better, but to transform society and to enhance justice and dignity for all. This discourse is not carried out in an impartial distanced, spectator-like manner, but asks for engagement, involvement and participation in the issues at stake. There is indeed immense potential in this approach for a theology that reflects upon the implications of God’s love for the world with its complex challenges.39

3.3 What will this rapidly growing Public theology become: a theological discipline, subdiscipline, research field, curriculum organiser, catalyst or new contextual theology?

Public theological discourse is growing all over the world. It is as yet not sure what status public theology will eventually enjoy. It is not certain whether it will become a new theological discipline, subdiscipline, research field, or a curriculum organiser, catalyst or new contextual theology.

Several reasons can be cited for the growing interest in what is called public theology. Sociologists of religion, such as the famous Boston scholar Peter Berger,40 affirm that there is a growth in religiosity all over the world. Even in highly secularised countries such as those in Northern Europe, Berger argues, religiosity is growing. This religiosity is not necessarily Christian religion or, for that matter, any form of institutionalised religion. But there is indeed a new awareness of and appreciation for the transcendental, the metaphysical, the divine, albeit not in the form of faith in a personal god, such as the triune God of Christianity. This growth in religion prompted Berger to replace his so-called secularisation thesis with what he now calls a desecularisation thesis. In various countries and on various continents religiosity in the form of institutionalised religion is growing, for example South America, Africa and Asia. In Africa Christianity experiences its highest growth. The forecast that the democratisation process in a country like South Africa would be accompanied by secularisation did not materialise. Thirteen Fifteen years after the dawning of democracy religion is alive and well in South Africa. In fact, Christianity is growing, especially in circles outside the so-called mainline churches. This growth in religiosity in a variety of forms paves the way for reflection on the place, form and role of religion in public life. Religion has the potential to play a constructive role in society. Therefore thorough reflection is required on how the redemptive, unifying, humanising and dignifying potential of religion can be explored. This is a task that public theology is called upon to embark on.

The growth in religiosity all over the world is unfortunately also accompanied by growth in local, regional and international conflicts that are fuelled by religion. Religion indeed has the potential to be destructive. It can foster doctrinal and moral absolutisms that leave no room for disagreement, debate and the recognition of ambiguity and uncertainty. In this context of absolutism moralism, judgementalism, stereotyping, generalisation, stigmatisation, demonisation and eventually more direct violence such as murder and bloodshed develop on personal and communal, local and global scales. This sad situation calls for thorough introspection by religious people and institutions, an introspection that is manifested in, as far as possible and appropriate, rational deliberation, intellectual inquiry and public justification of the plausibility of doctrinal and moral positions. For this crucial task public theology is required.

Another dangerous aspect of religion that needs to be redeemed by critical and communal rational discourse is the fact that some forms of religion justify positions of not only doctrinal relativism and nihilism but also of moral relativism and nihilism. This attitude has destructive outcomes, such as a spirit of greed and consumerism, a hedonistic and individualistic lifestyle, a lack of compassion and care for the other, the breakdown of social solidarity and cohesion, lawlessness and corruption, and so forth. The need for a theology that enables religious people and institutions to avoid both absolutism and also relativism and nihilism might be another reason for the growth in public theology discourses all over the world.

In various Western European countries immigration patterns lead to religious diversification, especially to increased interaction with Islam. These higher levels of religious diversity lead to higher levels of public debate about religious matters. The connectedness of some terrorist organisations with Islam increases this intense public focus on religion and specifically on Islam. To deal constructively with religious and related forms of diversity these societies need inputs from constructive public theological discourses.

Rapid and continuous social, cultural, political and economic changes and transformations all over the world on local, national, regional and global levels impact on religion and various types of theologies. In various countries the fall of communism, for instance, and the apparent victory of democracy and the global market economy challenge not necessarily the agenda but indeed the methodologies and epistemologies, the social analyses and theoretical presuppositions of different liberation theologies. Theologies in all countries of the world are challenged to think afresh about their agendas, priorities, methodologies and epistemologies in the light of processes such as political, cultural and economic globalisation as well as the global threat to the environment. In South Africa, specifically, the transformation from an apartheid to a democratic society poses special challenges to religion and theology. To embark faithfully on these tasks proper public theologies need to be developed.

The list of reasons for the interest in public theology can indeed be extended. Some would add that the name sells well: It ensures a place for religion in public life; it confirms the inherent public nature of all theology; and the term public is appropriate and relevant in the context of democratic societies where notions such as public, publicity, public-ness, public discourse, public opinion, public policy and so forth are well-established categories. The term public theology puts theology at the heart of modern public life, in other words in political and economic life, in civil society and in public opinion-formation processes. Whatever the reason, the notion of public theology is growing, and whilst keeping in mind that this undertaking, as is the case with all human endeavours, might be destructive, the constructive and redemptive potential in this development should be acknowledged and intentionally explored.

In the rapidly growing international discourses on public theology there is as yet no consensus on whether public theology should develop as a new contextual theology, discipline, subdiscipline, research field, curriculum organiser or catalyst for the advancement of an explicit focus on the public contents, rationality and implications of Christian faith, of God’s Trinitarian love for the world.

In a broader sense one could argue that all theology is indeed public theology. All theological disciplines and subdisciplines are engaged in public theology, some more directly and others more indirectly.41 In this broader understanding of public theology the current developing field of public theology can therefore be viewed as a catalyst. The use of this almost irritating tautology called public theology is crucial to remind all theological disciplines of the inherent public content, rationality and implications of Christian faith, the faith that teaches about the God who loves the world. This broader catalyst role of public theology is emphasised to such an extent by the Lutheran Theological Seminary of Philadelphia in the USA that it uses the notion of public theology as central category for the renewal of its theological curriculum.

There is, however, also room for a narrower understanding of public theology. In this sense public theology attends specifically to the third set of questions, that is the questions about the implications of God’s love for the world. Public theology in a narrower sense investigates the significance, meaning and consequences of this Trinitarian love for a variety of specific contextual public challenges. Although it addresses the first two sets of questions regarding the contents and rationality of God’s love for the world, public theology in a narrower sense emphasises the questions about the concrete public implications of God’s love for specific concrete public challenges. In addressing this third set of questions public theology specifically attends to the engagement of Christian faith with the public policy and public opinion formation processes in democratic societies. In terms of contemporary thinking about the theological encyclopaedia, systematic theological ethics might be the best equipped theological discipline to take up this task.

In fulfilling its task in a broader or narrower sense public theology does not aim to replace the various contextual and liberation theologies but rather drink from their rich wells.

3.4 The public of public theology?

In my own thinking the concept public is used in an inclusive way, not in the modernistic way of dichotomising life into so-called private and public spheres and in even fragmenting the public into various autonomous, isolated compartments with their own central values and rules. The concept public rather refers to the whole of life and challenges us to have God’s love for the whole world, for all of reality, in focus when we do theology in various theological disciplines and subdisciplines.

Dirkie Smit42 explains that notions such as public are used in a variety of ways. He also explains that these notions are filled with ambiguity and even contradictions. He identifies three main ways in which the concept public is used in contemporary societies. Related to these three different understandings of public, there are three corresponding understandings of public theology.

Public (öffentlicht) is used, firstly,43 under influence of especially Jürgen Habermas as that sphere of spaces and practices where an informed public opinion about the normative vision for society is formed and sustained. This sphere is characterised by critical discussion between equal partners and by being free of constraint, threat and self-interest and open to difference and otherness. Public in the sense of sphere of public discourse, public opinion formation, is able to resist and impact on the powers of politics and the market. The notion of public that has developed in modern democracies is used in diverse, even contradictory, ways. Some use public as in opposition to private; sometimes it is used in contrast to the state and even the market, therefore in the sense of public debate, public initiatives, public meetings, public polls and public organisations outside the state and market, for the sake of the so-called public interest; and sometimes public is used to refer to the state (and economy) that has the task to maintain the public sector, amongst others public services, public health, public transport, public roads, public social care, public education and public schools. Smit rightly also explains how the media that are by nature supposed to be public and in service of the normative public discussion and opinion formation are no longer viewed as public media per se. The term public media is reserved for the independent media that do not serve – whether openly or hidden, consciously or unconsciously – the ideological propaganda of the state and market.

Some approaches to public theology are based on this understanding of public as the sphere where a normative vision underlying contemporary democratic life in democratic societies is developed. This public theology takes on the form of public religion as civil religion, advocacy and struggle for specific goals, round-table forums that facilitate public dialogue and address tensions and conflicts in service of the common good and also participation in policy making and implementation. 44

A second understanding of public – perhaps the most common one in theological and church circles – is that public has to do with life in general, life in the world, the whole of creation, history, culture, social life, reality and humanity. Public theology that functions in the context of this broader, vaguer understanding of public focuses on three questions regarding the place, social form and role of the church in this broad public. Such a theology will acknowledge that the church exists in this public, it is part of it and it impacts knowingly and unknowingly on this public, and vice versa. This form of public theology will be interested in historical, systematic and legal issues involved in the specific social forms and specific structures of specific churches in specific societies. This approach to public theology, which is perhaps the most famous one, deals also with questions regarding the role of the church in society; in issues of state, power and politics; in issues of law, justice and civic life; in issues of economic life; in issues of war and peace; and in issues that have to do with the diverse arrangements of life in society and community, in civil society.45

The third understanding of public46 is even more vague. It functions with the presupposition that all theological discourse is public in the sense that it addresses specific audiences or publics, like David Tracy’s typology of the three publics of theology, namely society, academy and church. Theologians do their theology with specific publics in mind. In the process they internalise the claims, questions, themes, challenges, needs, rhetoric, nature of argumentation, understanding of truth, views on meaning and relevance, norms of communication, plausibility structures, criteria of adequacy and models of rationality from particular publics. In the framework of this notion of public, public theology is a value-free description of the audience that theologians have in mind in their theological labour.

I believe this diversity of approaches to and emphases in public theology is important. We need theologians who make a theological input in the discussion about the moral vision of society, in public opinion formation and implementation. We need theologians who deal with formal, methodological questions and also with material questions on the place, form and role of the church in broader public life. We need the skills to address different audiences or publics. Smit’s description of the plurality, diversity and ambiguity in the notions of public, therefore, does not leave us with the feeling of being overwhelmed, of relativism, of blurring complicatedness. Neither does his analysis pacify us. On the contrary, it fosters an acknowledgement and appreciation of the variety of public theology initiatives in different contexts. And it fosters self-understanding of our own approaches to public and public theology. Moreover, as the title of his article suggests, it invites continued discussion in the development of the important notion of public theology. Peculiar sociological and theological factors determine our approaches to and emphases in public theology. 47

At the Beyers Naude Centre for Public Theology we distinguish among four public spheres in democratic societies, namely the political and economic spheres as well as the spheres of civil society and public opinion formation.48

The political sphere focuses on the state, the government, political power and the control and regulation of public life.

The economic sphere entails aspects such as the so-called autonomous market economy, globalisation, ecology, science and technology.

Civil society focuses on themes relating to the relationship between theology and, amongst others, the institutions, organisations, associations and movements of civil society, which, independently from the state and economy, strive to enhance the quality of life, satisfy the needs and foster the interests of people, change the nature of society and build the common good, that is a life of quality for all. Schools, legal bodies, cultural and sports clubs and the neighbourhood are all institutions of civil society. Sociologically spoken churches are part of civil society.

The area of public opinion formation focuses, as explained above, on themes such as the nature of society, the common foundational values for society, common challenges for society and common priorities for society. The ensuing public opinion paves the way for jointly striving towards the common good.

3.5 The agenda of public theology?

The agenda of a faithful public theology cannot be different than the one set decades ago by liberation theology, as articulated by Latin American Liberation theologian Jon Sobrino:

Poverty is increasing in the Third World (sic), the gap between the rich and the poor countries is widening, there are wars – more than a hundred since the last world war and all of them in the ‘Third World’. Cultures are being lost through the imposition of foreign commercial cultures The cries of the oppressed keep rising to heaven … more and more loudly. God goes on hearing these cries, condemning oppression and strengthening liberation … What I ask myself is what a theology is going to do if it ignores this fundamental fact of God’s creation as it is. How can a theology call itself ‘Christian’ if it bypasses the crucifixion of whole people and their need for resurrection, even though its books have been talking about crucifixion and resurrection for twenty centuries? Therefore if those doing liberation theology are not doing it well, let others do it and do it better, but someone must keep on doing it.49

Reflecting on the contents, rationality and implications of God’s love for the whole world, especially for those whose dignity is violated and who suffer exclusion, exploitation and expandability, and for a creation that is killed by greed and consumerism is the agenda of public theology. And this reflection on God’s love for the world, this growth in knowledge, does not only help us to understand reality better, it does not merely illuminate reality, but this reflection and knowledge indeed help to transform reality so that it can increasingly reflect the redemptive, renewing and dignifying impact of God’s love.

4. Conclusion

So I will humbly try to fulfil the responsibilities of this chair of Systematic Theological Ethics with a focus on public theology, by attending to, on the one hand faith in the triune loving God, and on the other hand the world, the kosmos, which is the object of this Trinitarian love. I will continuously reflect on the contents and rationality of this love, and I will faithfully endeavour to reflect on the dignifying implications that this Trinitarian love has for the world with all its joys and sorrows. I will strive to fulfil this calling in a South Africa that is part of Africa and the global family.

TREFWOORDE

Publieke teologie, Intra-dissiplinêre, Inter-dissplinêre, Trans-dissiplinêre, Publiek, Rasionaliteit

KEY WORDS

Public theology, Intradisciplinary, Interdisciplinary, Transdisciplinary, Publics, Rationality

KONTAK BESONDERHEDE

Prof NN Koopman

Fakulteit Teologie

Universiteit van Stellenbosch

Privaatsak X1

MATIELAND 7602

Tel.:(021) 808 2452

Sel: 072 262 9813

E-pos: nkoopman@sun.ac.za