RELIGION 350. Christianity in the Modern World: Liberalism to Liberation
DePauw University
Fall 2004
Professor Valarie Ziegler
102a Harrison
Campus phone: 4028/ E-mail: VZiegler@depauw.edu
Office hours: Monday/Wednesday 10:10-11:10; Tuesday/Thursday after 4:00 and other times by appointment
Welcome to this seminar! I’m very much looking forward to working with you in our examination of modern Christian thought. In this course, we will identify crucial issues raised by modernity and examine a number of theological attempts to meet those challenges. We’ll have fun working through a series of classic texts.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS
This course is, above all else, dependent upon your careful preparation for, and willing participation in, our class conversations. It is not a lecture course, but is reading intensive and discussion intensive.
The most important expectation I have of you is that you will: do the readings, bring a copy of the readings with you when you come to class, and participate in class discussions. Do not come to class without the readings; if you do, I will ask you to leave.
The books for this class are available at Fine Print Book Store. As noted below, the Augustine book On Christian Doctrine is available online if you’d rather print it out instead of buying a bound copy. E-reserve readings should be printed out from Blackboard. The only reserve reading not available on Blackboard is A Short History of The Interpretation of the Bible by Robert Grant. A hard copy is on reserve in the library.
Each week, you will either write a short paper or give a class presentation. I will divide the class into two groups. On Tuesdays members of the first group will bring to class a 1-2 page paper written in response to the question posed in the syllabus for that assignment; members of group 2 will bring papers with them on Thursdays. Be prepared to share your papers aloud.
In addition to writing weekly short papers, students will also sign up for class presentations (see syllabus for topics). On weeks in which you present, you are excused from the paper assignment. Presenters should come to class with a 1 page precis to hand out to each class member. The precis will include the following: (1) a summary of the reading’s argument (“explain”), (2) an assessment of that argument (e.g.: is it coherent? what are its dis/advantages? why is it significant?), and (3) questions for class discussion. Presentations should last 5-10 minutes. They should also represent you own work and your own words. You must document sources. Do not—repeat, DO NOT—go to the internet and import words, phrases, or ideas that you do not understand. Also remember that the first (and probably the best) place to find background material is in the Livingston texts. If you have trouble understanding the assignment, please talk to me. Also, please understand this: if you hand out a précis that delineates ideas that you picked up from an outside source and cannot explain, you will get a failing grade. If your précis contains ideas or language borrowed from a source that is not referenced, I will ask the Office of Academic Affairs to investigate for plagiarism.
Every student will be responsible for preparing for class discussions by reading, reflecting, and drafting written comments on the assigned texts. You are all strong students, and the opportunity to join in significant analysis and discussion of theological sources will be exciting for all of us. When you leave this class, you will be pleased to see how much you’ve grown intellectually.Requirements to Receive S Credit
Your grade will not be calculated differently because this is an S class –but if you wish to receive S certification for this class, you must satisfy the following criteria:
1. You must average at least an 80 in class participation. That means you must attend class regularly and contribute to class discussion regularly. Your weekly papers will tell me how well you are preparing before you come to class; there should not be a huge discrepancy between careful preparation and contributions to class discussions. In short, writing good papers but remaining largely mute will not constitute a satisfactory progress toward S certification.
2. You must average at least an 80 in class presentations. Everyone will have the opportunity to present 3-4 times; by the end of the term, you should have demonstrated your ability to organize material coherently and present it to your peers in such a way that you can initiate and guide intelligible discussion. Taken as a whole, your class presentation grade must represent B work; obviously, that means is possible to overcome one poor presentation by superior work in others.
Your final grade will be determined as follows:
1. Class participation: 20% of your grade. Doing a good job in class discussions doesn’t mean talking constantly, or even every class session. It means coming to class prepared to discuss the readings and providing thoughtful comments on a consistent basis.
2. Altogether you will do 12 regular papers/presentations. I’ll drop the two lowest grades (unless one of them is a zero for failing to make a scheduled presentation). Each paper/presentation is worth 7% of your grade.
3. A final paper/exam worth 10% of your grade.OTHER STUFF
Absences: You are allowed 2 cuts. Each additional absence will result in the deduction of two points from your final average. Being tardy counts for half an absence. You're tardy if you arrive in class AFTER I shut the door to begin, but BEFORE 15 minutes have expired. Leaving before the end of class counts as half an absence as well.
You can use your cuts for anything you wish, but you only get 2. If you have to be out of town for a varsity game, if you need to go home for your grandmother's birthday, if you are sick in bed, or just don't feel like getting out of it, it's all the same. Those of you who are involved in campus activities (sports, newspaper, theater, etc.) may need to use your cuts for commitments in those areas. That's fine, but you don't get three cuts in addition to "school related" absences. No one is entitled to extra cuts because of participation in extracurricular activities.
Policy on late papers: no late papers will be accepted.
Academic integrity: I will observe the University policy on academic integrity, and urge you to consult the Student Handbook to familiarize yourself with that policy. Cheating in any form (on exams, papers, etc.) will result in reductions of grade or in your failing the classGrading scale:
90-100 A (90-92 = A-)
80-90 B (88-89 = B+ / 80-82 = B-)
70-80 C (78-79 = C+ / 70-72 = C-)
60-70 D (68-69 = D+ / 60-62 = D-)Required texts:
Livingston, et al, Modern Christian Thought, vols. I and II. Prentice Hall, 2000. 0-02-271423-0 and 0-02-371410-7.
Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson, A Map of Twentieth-Century Theology, Fortress Press, 1995. 0800626969
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine. Translated by D.W. Robertson. MacMillan, Library of Liberal Arts, 1958. 0024021504 (Also available online; see syllabus)
H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture. HarperSanFrancisco, 1956. 0061300039.
James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation. Orbis, revised 1990. 0-88344-685-5
Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her. SPRING ARB, 10th anniversary edition, 1994. ISBN 0-8245-1357-6

Schedule of Readings
8/26 Introduction to the course
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO READ THE BIBLE AS SCRIPTURE? THEORETICAL APPROACHES
8/31 RESERVE: Origen, De Principiis (Paulist Press, 1979), IV, chapters 1-3 (pp. 171-205); Origen, “Homily IV on Genesis,” in Homilies on Genesis and Exodus (Catholic University, 1982), pp. 103-111; Robert M. Grant, “The School of Alexandria,” A Short History of t 1982), The Interpretation of the Bible (Macmillan, 1985), pp. 52-62.
[For greater depth, see “Origen as Biblical Scholar,” The Cambridge History of the Bible, I, 454-489.]
Presenters: (1) Origen’s “method” of interpretation in De Principiis (2) Biographical information; assess how Origen applies his “method” in his “Homily on Genesis”
Class: assess what he means (and does not mean) when he says the “scriptures are divinely inspired” (p. 171), and come to class ready to discuss your point of view.
9/2 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, Prologue; Book I, chapters 1-5, 35-40; Book II, chapters 1-18, 39-42; Book III entire [online at http://www.ccel.org/a/augustine/doctrine/doctrine.html]
--RESERVE: Augustine, selections from The City of God, Book Sixteen, chapters 1-3, pp. 317-322, online at http://ccel.org/fathers/NPNF1-02/Augustine/cog/t83.htm; Grant, “The Authoritative Interpretation,” A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible, pp. 73-82.
[For greater depth, see “Augustine as Biblical Scholar,” The Cambridge History of the Bible, I, 541-563.]
Presenters: (3) Augustine’s “method” of interpretation in On Christian Doctrine (4) Biographical information; assess how Augustine applies his “method” in City of God
Writers: assess this claim about interpreting the Bible (p. 30): “Whoever, therefore, thinks that he understands the divine Scriptures or any part of them so that it does not build the double love of God and of our neighbor does not understand it at all. Whoever finds a lesson there useful to the building of charity, even though he has not said what the author may be shown to have intended in that place, has not been deceived, nor is he lying in any way.”
9/7 RESERVE: Martin Luther, Works of Martin Luther, vol. 35 (Muhlenberg Press, 1960), "On Translating: An Open Letter" (pp. 181-202) [online at http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/luther-translate.txtp , and "Preface to the Old Testament," pp. 235-250.
--Luther, Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings (Anchor, 1961), “Preface to the New Testament,” pp. 13-19; selected passages from “Preface to Romans,” pp. 19, 34 [online at http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/german.bible/rom-eng.txt]; “Preface to James and Jude," pp. 35-37; "Of the perspicuity of Scripture," pp.171-175; "Sermons on the Catechism” The Lord’s Supper," pp. 234-239. (Dillenberger, Martin Luther);
--“The Wit and Wisdom of Martin Luther” (Ziegler); Grant, “The Bible and the Reformation,” A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible, pp. 92-99.
Presenters: (5) Biographical information; assessment of “On Translating,” particularly Luther’s discussion of the ways to render Latin into German and his notion of the “Word”; (6) “Preface to the OT”: assess how theology drives interpretation, especially his understanding of “law” and of the ways in which the OT reveals Christ; (7) assess the other readings in comparison to the first two, in particular how Luther decides what is “noble and best” in Scripture, and how his theory of interpretation matches his exegesis in her sermon on the catechism.
Writers: clearly, Luther’s theology drives his interpretation. Is that legitimate? Isn’t it inevitable?
9/9 RESERVE: Benjamin Jowett, "The Interpretation of Scripture" in Jowett et al, Essays and Reviews (London, 1862), online at http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/1860-essays-reviews/images.html; Horace Bushnell, “Preliminary Dissertation on Language,” (1849).
--Livingston I, 237-250; 105-112.
Presenters: (8) Biographical information on Jowett; assessment of his presuppositions and method of interpretation; (9) Biographical information on Bushnell; assessment of his thesis and application to theological language
Writers: Identify the central thesis for each writer and comment on what you find most/least persuasive about one of them.
9/14 RESERVE: Charles Hodge, “Introduction to Systematic Theology,” and Alexander Archibald Hodge with B.B. Warfield, “Inspiration,” in Mark A. Noll, The Princeton Theology (Baker, 1983), pp. 117-131, 218-232; J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, chapters 1 and 4, http://www.crta.org/books/chr_and_lib/index.html
--Livingston I, 299-323; Livingston II, 387-390
Presenters: (10) biographical information on Hodge and assessment of his claim that theology is a science; (11) biographical information on Warfield; assessment of his presuppositions and method of interpretation; (11) biographical information; explain and assess Machen’s theological method, particularly his rejection of “liberal” Christianity and his understanding of the relation of facts and meaning
Writers: These authors of the Princeton School helped create modern American fundamentalism. Answer one of the following: (a) what theological innovations do you see in their work? (b) compare and contrast Warfield’s view of the interpretation of scripture to Luther’s or to Jowett’s
(c) compare and contrast the understanding of theological truth of either Hodge or Machen to Bushnell.CHRIST AND CULTURE
9/16 H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture (entire)
--Livingston II, 165-175.
Presenters: Explain and assess: (12) X of culture; (13) X against culture; (14) X above culture; (15) X and culture in paradox; (16) X transforming culture
Writers: which position do you find most consistent with your own understanding of Christianity? Explain.
9/21 Reinhold Niebuhr, “Human Nature and Politics” in Braaten and Jenson
[hereafter B&J], A Map of Twentieth-Century Theology, pp. 367-376.
--RESERVE-- Reinhold Niebuhr, “Why the Christian Church Is Not Pacifist” in The Essential Reinhold Niebuhr (Yale, 1986), pp. 102-119; Selections from Reinhold Niebuhr, Hodgson and King, pp. 161-167, 192-196; selections from ch. 1 and 7 of Niebuhr, The Irony of American History (Scribners, 1952), Religion-Online, http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=451.
-Livingston II, 175-191.
Presenters: (17) Niebuhr argues that the church should not be pacifist, even though Jesus was. Assess this claim in light of Niebuhr’s views of sin, love, justice, and NT.
Writers: Niebuhr argues that the church should not be pacifist, even though Jesus was. Why does he say that, and how do you assess his claim?
For everyone to consider: In The Irony of American History, Niebuhr was writing about the perils the Unites States faced in the Cold War confrontation with communism. “Irony” in history means that national policies and actions always entail unforeseen (and unintended) consequences. How might Niebuhr apply this concept to the current war in Iraq?
9/23 RESERVE: John Howard Yoder, “Reinhold Niebuhr and Christian Pacifism,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 29 (April, 1955), 101-117; “What Would You Do If....” Journal of Religious Ethics 2/2 (1974), 81-105, online at http://63.136.1.23/pls/eli/ashow?aid=ATLA0000744191 (access through ATLA); “The Politics of God and the Politics of Men,” For the Nations (Eerdmans, 1997), pp. 221-236.
Presenters: (18) assess Yoder’s critique of Niebuhr; (19) assess Yoder’s theological ethic in the last 2 articles
Writers: did you find Yoder’s defense of Christian pacifism convincing? If so, explain the parts of his argument that persuaded you. If not, delineate the weaknesses of his argument.CASE STUDIES: CHRIST, CULTURE, AND SCRIPTURE
9/28 RESERVE: Jim Furman and Angie Hamilton, “Christianity and Homosexuality,” REL 370, Fall, 1998. Precis; reference page; readings from John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (University of Chicago, 1980), pp. 92-99, 106-115; Southern Baptist Convention, “Report of the Baptist Faith and Message Study Convention, June 9, 1998,” www.sbc.net/bfmreport1998.cfm; “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexuals,” www.odyssee.net/~prince/halloween; “Homosexuality, marriage, and the church: A conversation,” The Christian Century (July 1-8, 1998): 644-650, online at http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_n19_v115/ai_21003284; UFMCC Bylaws, “Homosexuality Not a Sin...,” UFMCC on Gay Marriages, all at www.wfmc.com; Religious/Denominational Stances Concerning Homosexuality, at www.religioustolerance.org; “Biblical Passages on Same Sex Relations”( Valarie Ziegler).
–Genesis 19:1-29
Presenters: (20) assess Boswell; (21) compare and assess the principal positions in the remaining readings
Writers: you just read a lot of theories about what scripture might say regarding homosexuality. Is this an issue, in your opinion, that scripture addresses or answers? If so, lay out the principal texts and interpretation. If not, explain why you don’t find a coherent explication of this issue in scripture.
9/30 RESERVE: Margaret Talbot, “A Mighty Fortress,” The New York Times Magazine (Feb. 27, 2000), online at http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=158; Michael Lienesch, “Anxious Patriarchs: Authority and the Meaning of Masculinity in Christian Conservative Social Thought,” Journal of American Culture 13, 4 (Winter, 1990), 47-55; Phyllis Schlafly, The Power of the Christian Woman (Standard, 1981), pp. 56-71; Christel Manning, “Traditionalists in Church and Synagogue,” God Gave Us the Right (Rutgers, 1999), pp. 104-123; Lauren Winner, “The Weigh and the Truth,” Christianity Today (Sept. 4, 2000), 51-58, http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/010/1.50.html; Charlie Shedd, “Ask God to Attend Each Bite,” Pray Your Weight Away (J.B. Lippincott, 1957), pp. 90-110; Gwen Shamblin, The Weigh Down Diet (Doubleday, 1997), pp. 1-11, 63.
Please note: these readings were used in group projects in REL 271 (Fall 2000) by Catherine Bosin, Kaeley Lynch, Kate Hinkle, and Julia Demske.
Presenters: (22) Talbot, Schlafly; (23) Lienesch, Manning; (24) Winner, Shedd, and Shamblin
Writers: Group A--Using H.R. Niebuhr’s typologies, how would you assess the ways in which the Christians in the first 4 readings construct gender roles? Group B--did the readings convince you that weight was a topic worthy of theological concern? Explain.THE QUEST FOR THE HISTORICAL JESUS
10/5 RESERVE: Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Life of Jesus (Sigler,
1997),"Introduction"; selections from Schleiermacher, Hodgson and King, Readings in Christian, pp. 153-157, 217-221, 247-250.
--Livingston I, “Schleiermacher,” 83-105.
Presenters: (25) explain and assess Schleiermacher’s method in writing a biography of Jesus; (26) biographical information; relate Schleiermacher’s work on a biography of Jesus to his theory of the three stages of human consciousness.
Writers: Schleiermacher says that “if a historical presentation wishes to be actual history, it cannot restrict itself only to what is externally perceptible” (p. 4). Why is it important to Schleiermacher to show Jesus’ inner lifer? Is such a portrayal, in your opinion, possible?
10/7 RESERVE: Martin Kahler, “Against the Life-of-Jesus Movement,” in The So-called Historical Jesus and the Historic Biblical Christ (Fortress, 1988), pp. 46-71; Rudolph Bultmann, “New Testament and Mythology,” parts I and II in Kerygma and Myth (Harper & Row, 1961), pp. 1-44; online at http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=431&C=292 and http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=431&C=293.
--Livingston I, 284-286; II, pp. 153-161.
Presenters: (27) Biographical information; explain and assess Kahler’s argument against the Life-of-Jesus movement; (28) biographical information; explain and assess Bultmann’s attempt to demythologize the New Testament.
Writers: both writers make a distinction between the figure of Jesus in the New Testament text and the “real” Jesus who stands behind the text. Answer one of the following:(A) is Bultmann right when he says that to understand the New Testament readers must separate the first-century prescientific world view from the text’s essential message? (B) are you convinced by Kahler’s claim that knowledge of the historical Jesus is irrelevant to Christian faith?
10/12 RESERVE: Fulton Oursler, The Greatest Story Ever Told (Doubleday, 1951), pp. vii-x, 42-55; Bruce Barton, “The Man Nobody Knows,” The Role of Religion in American Life, pp. 293-303; “Jesus Seminar and Premises and Rules of Evidence”; Marcus Borg, “Does the Historical Jesus Matter?”in Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship (Trinity, 1994), pp. 182-200; John Dominic Crossan, “Why Christians Must Search for the Historical Jesus,” Bible Review 12 (April, 1996), pp. 34-39, 42-45; Luke Johnson, “The Real Jesus,” in Greenspoon, Hamm, and LeBeau, The Historical Jesus Through Catholic and Jewish Eyes (Trinity, 2000), pp. 51-65.
Presenters: (29) Consider Oursler, Barton, Borg, and the Jesus Seminar rules of evidence and assess how well they reconstruct and reveal the significance of the historical Jesus to modern readers. (30) Compare and contrast Crossan and Johnson on the usefulness of reconstructing the historical Jesus.
Writers [NOTE: EVERYONE will write on this topic this week; there is NO Thursday writing]: In what ways, if any, does your reading lead you to conclude that the historical Jesus matters to Christian faith? In what ways, if any, is the historical Jesus irrelevant to Christian faith?

10/14 Film: Bonhoeffer
FALL BREAK!!!!!!!!! CRITICAL TURNING POINTS
10/26 B&J: Karl Barth, “Epistle to the Romans” and "The Strange New World Within the Bible," pp. 42-50, 21-30; Paul Tillich, “Systematic Theology,” pp. 80-93.
--RESERVE: Barmen Declaration, online at http://www.christian-bible.com/Exegesis/Confessions/barmendc.htm
--LIVINGSTON II, 63-76, 140-152.
Presenters: (31) Biographical information; explain and assess Barth’s “dialectical” theology in his Epistle to the Romans; (32) explain and assess Barth’s view of scripture in “Strange New World of the Bible” and his understanding of the church’s relationship to culture in the Barmen Declarations ; (33) Biographical information; explain and assess Tillich’s theological method.
Writers: What is the strange new world within the Bible, and how does it relate to Barth’s critique of religion in his work on Romans? Or: assess Tillich’s method of correlation—what are its advantages and disadvantages?
11/28 B&J: Dietrich Bonhoeffer, “Letters to Eberhard Bethge,” pp. 98-107
--RESERVE: Bonhoeffer,“Who Am I?, online at http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=385; “Is God Dead?” Time (April 8, 1966), pp. 82-87; William Hamilton, “The Death of God Theologies Today” and “Thursday’s Child,” from Thomas Altizer and William Hamilton, Radical Theology and the Death of God (Bobbs Merrill, 1966), online at http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=537
--LIVINGSTON II, pp. 92-93, 111-128, 500-503.
Further reading: William Hamilton, “Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Death of God,” Religion-Online, http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=537&C=591
Presenters: (34) assess Bonhoeffer; (35) assess “death of God” theologians, including this claim (from “Further reading” above): Bonhoeffer insists that Christians, working alongside nonbelievers, are “ challenged to participate in the sufferings of God at the hands of a godless world."
Writers: explain and assess what these theologians meant when they spoke of the death of God.
11/2 James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, (entire); Robert McAfee Brown, “Learning From James Cone,” 164-169.
--Livingston II, pp. 443-466.
Presenters: (36) biographical information and bibliography of important works published; (37) assess text
Writers: how did this book make you angry, and how did it make you think?
11/4 RESERVE: Valerie Saiving, “The Human Situation: A Feminine Point of View” in Carol Christ and Judith Plaskow, Womanspirit Rising (HarperSanFrancisco, 1992), pp. 25-42); "A clergy wife's story " in Margaret Ann Franklin, The Force of the Feminine (Unwyn Hyman, 1986), pp. 100-112); Elizabeth A. Johnson, “Redeeming the Name of Christ,” Freeing Theology (HarperSanFrancisco, 1993), pp.115-120, 129-131; Lynn Japinga, “Language About God,” Feminism and Christianity (Abingdon), pp. 55-72; “Clarice J. Martin, “The Haustafeln (Household Codes) in African American Biblical Interpretation,” in Cain Hope Felder, Stony the Road We Trod (Fortress, 1991), pp. 206-231; New Testament Texts Relating to Genesis 1-3, Eve and Adam (Ziegler).
--Livingston II, pp. 417-438, 460-466.
Presenters: (38) explain and assess Saiving’s critique of traditional theological discussions of anthropology; (39) explain and assess the ways in which the clergy wife and Johnson critique traditional Christian understandings of the significance of gender for redemption; (40) explain and assess Japinga’s critique of traditional Christian language about God; (41) explain and assess Martin’s critique of traditional Christian readings of the New Testament household codes.
Writers: what common themes do you see among these writers? Do you see any significant differences?
11/9 Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, chapters 1-3.
Presenters: (42) bio, intro and ch. 1. Schussler Fiorenza argues in chapter 1 that only a historical reconstruction of the early Jesus movement (and not a theological study of scripture, or a jettisoning of the Christian tradition as sexist) will allow Christians to reclaim Christianity as a religion that regards all believers as equal. Explain and assess. (43) ch. 2-3. Schussler Fiorenza argues on p. 60 that “androcentric texts and documents do not mirror historical reality, report historical facts, or tell us how it actually was.” Delineate and assess how “it” (the role of gender in the early Jesus movement) was, according to S-F’s reconstruction of the early church in ch. 2-3.
Writers: S-F argues that “our heritage is our power.” What do you regard as the most persuasive argument she makes in her attempt to reconstruct the early church as an egalitarian movement? What, in your opinion, is the greatest weakness in her argument?
11/11 Schussler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, chapters 4-5.
Presenters: (44) assess ch. 4, being careful to state the thesis (45) assess ch. 5, being careful to state the thesis
Writers: S-F claims on p. 184 that ?our sources still allow us to see that this movement was not structured after the Greco-Roman patriarchal household and did not espouse the love patriachalism by which the later church adapted itself to the structures of its society.@ Does S-F=s discussion ch. 4-5 of Jesus as the ?sophia@ of God, convince you that she=s right in this claim?
11/16 RESERVE: Vatican II. A. Greeley, “Second Vatican Council,” http://agreeley.com/articles/vatican2.htm; Dignititis Humanae (Declaration on Religious Freedom), http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html; Unitatis Redintegratio (Decree on Ecumenism), http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html; Nostra Aetate (Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions), http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html.
–Livingston, -Modern Christian Thought II (MCT) 233-271
Presenters: (44) explain the historical background and principle reforms of Vatican II, and assess Dignitatis Humanae’s attempt to balance religious freedom with what it calls the Christian duty to proclaim Christ; (45) In days of old, Catholicism claimed that there was no salvation outside the church. What do Nostra Aetate and Unitatis Redintegratio say?
Writers[NOTE: EVERYONE will write on this topic this week; there is NO Thursday writing]: Pick one of the following: (a) the Vatican II writers faced the challenge of reforming a tradition that in theory could not “change” because it was inspired and guided by revelation. How do you assess the writers’ ability to “reform” but not “change” the tradition? Point to specific examples. (b) Assess the documents’ analysis of Judaism (is it a legitimate religion?) and of Christianity’s relationship to Judaism (is anti-Semitism theologically legitimate?)
11/18 Film: Life of Brian
11/23 Film: Passion of the Christ
11/30 RESERVE: Boston College, “The Christian Teaching of Contempt for Jews and Judaism: A Primary Source Sampler, http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/education/contempt.htm
National Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Criteria for the Evaluation of
Dramatizations of the Passion,” http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/documents/catholic/Passion_Plays.htm; Philip A. Cunningham, “Excerpts from Roman Catholic Magisterial Teaching Documents on the Crucifixion,” http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/education/magisterium_crucifixion.htm; Michael G. Lawler, “Sectarian Catholicism and Mel Gibson,” Journal of Religion and Film 8, 1 (Feb., 2004), http://avalon.unomaha.edu/jrf/2004Symposium/Lawler.htm; Paula Fredriksen, “History, Hollywood, and the Bible: Some Thoughts on Gibson’s Passion,” Journal of Religion and Film 8, 1 (Feb., 2004), http://avalon.unomaha.edu/jrf/2004Symposium/Frederiksen.htm; Mark Goodacre, “The Passion, Pornography and Polemic: In Defense of The Passion of the Christ,” http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Goodacre_Passion_Defense3.htm; Geza Vermes, “Celluloid Brutality,” http://bibleinterp.com/articles/Vermes_Passion_Brutality.htm.
Presenters: (46) What is Catholic about Gibson’s film, and what is “sectarian” Catholic (see Lawler)? Why do conservative Protestants like this film? (47) How well does Gibson follow the Catholic Church’s guidelines for depictions of the passion/crucifixion? Assess the claim that the film is anti-Semitic. (48) On viewing the film, Pope John Paul II supposedly remarked, “It is as it was.” Assess the historical accuracy and theological implications of Gibson’s film.
Writers: On viewing the film, Pope John Paul II supposedly remarked, “It is as it was.” Assess the historical accuracy and theological implications of Gibson’s film. Or: what (theologically, politically, etc.) was Gibson trying to say in this film, and why did it infuriate some viewers while delighting others?
12/2 TBA: The class can choose the topic.
12/7 B&J: Karl Rahner, “Christianity and the Non-Christian Religions,” pp. 231-246 and Alfred North Whitehead, “Process Theology,” pp. 340-348.
-- RESERVE: Hodgson and King, Readings in Modern Christian Theology,: pp.375-380 (John Cobb).
--Livingston II, 469-489, 312-320.
Presenters: (49) Rahner, (50) Cobb, (51) Whitehead
Writers: Choose one: (a) how does Whitehead’s notion of God differ from traditional views, and what distinct advantages/disadvantages does his depiction of a dipolar God intimately involved in the life of the world offer? (b) what do you find problematic/persuasive in the analysis by Rahner and Cobb of Christianity’s relationship to the other world religions?
12/9 Final reflections
FINAL EXAM: TBA