The Vatican's quarrel with Roger Haighl

Postmodern Jesusby Thonuis P. Rausch, S.J.

IN FEBRUARY the Jesuit theolopan RogerfdriiuT prof't'ssor at Weston Jesuit School oi Thcolo-g\ ill (Cambridge, Mn.s.sac"liiist'tt.s. received notiOca-Hon that the Vatican had found "serious doc-trimJ er-

rors" in his 1999 hnok Jesus: Stjniho! of Cod (Oihis) iuidthat he was torbidden to teach as a Ciatliolic theologian.The news did not come as a surprise. He had been in-volved for five years in an exchange with the Vatican andhis Jesuit superior general over tlie contents of the hook.He resigned From Weston in 2(M).3 and liassince taught at Union Theologiciil Semi-nar)' in New York.

The controversy bet\veen Fatlier Haightand tlie Vatican's Sacred Congregation fortlie Doctrine of the Faith raises a nnmherof chfficult and challenging questions.What was Hiiight tr\ing to do? Wliat werethe CDFs objections? How was his workreceived by the theological coniniunity?

ITaighfs book insist.s from the begin-ning that theologv must l>e done in dia-li)gue \\'ith the postmodern world. He ar-gues that in a postniotlern culture witli itspluralistic conscioiisue.ss one can no longerclaim the superiority of (.Christianity toother religions, or Christ as the absolutecenter to which all other mediations of siJ-vation arc relative. This nieaiis that the dogmatic .state-ments ol faith, particularly in the area oi Christologv, needto be rethought and reinterpreted in a cultural and linguis-tic context different from the one in which they were firstformulated.

Key to Haight s method is the concept of symbol, a cre-atetl person, oliject or event that makes known or presentthe transcendent realit\' of CJod, wliicli remains aK\ays be-yond our direct experience. Symbolic language is poetic.Imaginative and figurative; it does not provide objectiveknowledge about tran.scendent reiUities. though it medi-atesacertain experience of G(Ki. Intliis way. Haight seeksto avoiil a "iiaTve rr\elatioiia! positivism." Mis aim is to re-think christological doctiiiu- and set it within the contextof a "general theory of religion in tenns of religious episte-molog\."

What emerges from Haight's method is a disjiincturelainiliar in Protestant theologx-—the difference betweenthe approaches ol Frirdrich Schleiernuiclier aTicI Karl

In seekuigto do theologyill dialogueHitli iiiodernity,Haight hasperhapsconcededtoo much tocontemporarycnltm'e.

Biirtli. Schleiennacher .sought to situate theolog\- witliiu ageneral tlieolog) of religious oonscionsness, w hile Rarthinsisted on the special and particular character ol Chris-tian revelation. On the Catholic side, some see a similardifference between the w'ork of Karl RaJuier and Hans Urs\<in Balthasar. Selileierniacher and Kalmer, like Haight.are seeking to theologize in conscious dialogue withniodernily. even at the cost ol cultiira! accommodation.Barth, with his locus on the Word of (MKI. and von

BiJtIutsar, with his constant, contemplativegaze on the figure of the crncilied andrisen Jesus, take seriously the uni(|ueuessof Cod's revelation in Christ.

There is much to recommend iu Haight'sapproach; it could be said to be e\ angelicalin the best sense ofthe word. It is an at-tempt to proclaim the giKKl news of Cod'ssalvation in (Jhiist in language that pei'plcliving in a postmodern culture cau hear andunderstiuid. On the other hand, he uiayalsohave gone too far t() accouniKKlate a culturethut lloMrishcs onlv in the raiided atmo-sphere of the contemporary' nniversity. In-deed, iiltliongh [XJStmiKleniism isthenilingideoloi ' ol the academy, whether (here arereally an\' postniotlern people is another(jucstion. In any case, tlieolc^ should chal-

lenge (ulture as well ;is engage in dialogue vsith it. and itslionld lie able to speiik iil.so to the chnrcii.

The CDF raised seven specifU- points in regard toHiiigiits book. First, it had serions reservations about histheological method. W hile recognizing Haight's attemptto establish a "critical correlation" between the data offaith and postmodeni cultnre. it argued that his methodactually results "iu a subordination of the conti'iit of laithto its plansibilit) and intelligibility' in postmodern culture."lt also cliargeil that in asserting that the Lx)gos should beunderstood in a purely metaphorical sense. Haight deniedthe preexistence and incarnation ofthe Word as well as thedivinitv'of Jesns.

In regard to the Trinit); the CDF rejected Haight's viewthat the Logos and Spirit are symlxjis representing two dif-

TliODias P. Rausch ieaches (if hnjola Mcinjmounl Unicentlty iuLos Angeles and is ihc author of Who Is Jesus? An Intro-duction toCliristologv'(/,(7nrgirn/Pr<P«si.

CHRISTIAN CENTURY May3.20(J5 28

i'ereiit historical, sahilic nif cliLitions ol the one Ciod, ratlierthan rfterriiig to tlu- (lilTorentiatt'd inner life ot Cod. TheVaticiin also argues that Haiglit diti not afPinii the sahnficvalue of tlie deatli ol" Jesus and the universal salvilic iiiis-sioii olje.sus. and it raise.s questions about his presentationofthe resurrection.

WIIII.F, IIAIGHT'S BOOK Wiis widely acclaimed,receivintf the Catholic Press Association'sav\arcl as the best book ou theolog)^ in 2000,some tlieoloLjians did iiave serious problems

with tlu'work. Without denying tiiat tiiere were problems,the Catholic Thet)logiuil Society ui Americas board of di-rectors issued a statement protesting the CDF's interven-tion a.s tlireatening "tlie \^^^^\• process of serious, .systemat-ic, internal criticisni which the congregation and tlie bish-ops have long been encouraging among theologians." The(liret'tors said lliat Ilaiglits inxik "iia.s dniie a great servicein Iraniing t-nicial <iiiestioiis tliat need to he addressedtoday," at the same time notingthat the tlieologiciJ communi-t\ has lu-en in the process oiengaging in a lively debateover tlie strengths and weak-nesses nf his speculative pro-posals.

In short. v\'liile many theolo-gians continue to liavc seiiousrest'wations ai)out Haight'sChristolog\- and agree witli theCDFs criti(|ue, there is a gen-eral sense that the CDFmoved too (piickly on tlie easeaiul (lid not respect the debatealready taking place in the the-ological conmmnity.

My own sense is thatHaiglit's choice of a SpiritChrislology, ratlier than thetraditional Logos Christolog)',makes Jt'sns a uni<jiie media-tor oi tlie Spirit I)iit not tlic in-carnation oi'the Word. Thisleads in tiini to a diminishetl tloctrine oCtlieTrlnit)-, with a"niiitarian" uiiclerstaiiding of (ioct. According to Ilaighl,God is inanifested in history as Father, Son and Spirit, huttliis languagedoesnot say anything ahont ihe divine innerlife.

Some theologians, like Joseph Bracken, argue thatHaight's Cliristolog)', while radical in some senses, is notradical enoiigli. as it fails tt) see that relationality—thetrinitarian coinninnion oFpersons—is at the very heart ofthe Christian understanding of Cod.

A particular streugtii of i laight s hook is the effort hemakes to n'tliiiik the doctrine of salvation. Protestant the-ology, particularl) evangelical theology, lias canonizedAnsehn's theoiy of satisfaction, wliidi appears again forCatliolics in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Manyfind Anselm's theology inadec^uate for hoth theological

CONTROVERSIAL SCIIOIAR: Roger llaight hm beenprohibited from teaching as a i'atholic theologian.

and pastoral reasons, in that it suggests Cods ju.stice canhe satisfied only hy the death oi an only helovetl Son. East-ern theolngx', with its tloetrine oi ili\ini/.atioii. has avoidedthis doctrine, which seems to reduce saK ation to a tnuisiu.-tion. The patristic imd indeed the hihiieal traditions iireiimeh richer.

1 think Ilaiglit is correct in arguing lor other media-tors of salvation, including hoth non-Christian religionsand secular realities—something recognized hy main-stream Catholic theology. Building on Vatican 11, PtppeJohn Paul II acknowledged in his encyclical licdcinp-torifi ini.s.sio that the Spirit vnu affect "society and liistor)'.peoples, eultnies and religions." M the same time, fewCatholic theologians would want to move so far as tosuggest replacing a eliristnccntrie tlieitlogy witli atheticentrie one. llaight's jesiis is a teacher and exem-plar hut not the sole, universal savior, and llaigliCs ap-parent inahility to find any positive value in the crossseems t(t me a weakness in his work.

The case of Father llaightraises a numher of qnestionsfaced l)v all t-hinches; \\ hat isthe authority of scripture,what is the relatitin betweentheolog\' and chnrch authority,and what is the role ol aca-demic theolog)- in seminaries,divinity schools and under-graduate miiversit\' programs?

lhiight's approaclt ti> serip-tnre differs little from that ofother mainstream theologians.He argnes that tlie way scrip-ture was used hy the CrHincil o(Nicea (325). which presumed itto he "a source ni directly rep-resentative information, likefacts or objective data, ahcnittnmseendent realitw" is nolonger a^-ceptahle. He muler-slaiids hihiieal language as"symholie ol exjienenci.' that ishistoriciilly mediated."

So he warns ahont reading ihe "poetrv" ofthe prologuein Joim's Cospcl in a literalist niaimer aiul sees the eniptv'tomh and appearanee narratives iis not so imich historicalnuiTatives as "ways ofCxpressing and teaching the coiitfntof a faith already formed." Withniil denying thai the resm-rection was a real, eschatological act ot Cod on Jesns, manytheologians would agree with 1 laighi on these [points.

The earliest tradition, the Faster keiygina. shiiply pro-claims that Cod raised Jesiis and that there are witnesses.The later Easter appearance narratives are stories createdprecisely to help memhers of early Christian eomnimiitiesto recogni/-c' the presence ofthe risen Jesus in their midst,"in the hreaking of the bread" ofthe Eucharist (Luke24:35) or without seeing him themselves, as in thestoiyoi'doui)ting Thomas (John 20:29).

The CDF's insistence that "the appearances of tiie risen

29 CIIHISTIAN CKNTUHV Miiv.'!. 2005

Lord and tlic empty tftnih arc tho foiindation ofthe faith ofthe di.st.-iples in the rcsurrt'ction olClinst. und not viceversa" seems to take the appearance luurativt's as histori-cal accounts. This seems difficult to reconcile with thePontifical Biblical CoinmLs.sioirs J993 instruction "The In-terpretation of tlie Bible in the Church,"' which criticizesfundamentalist interpretations for rejecHni critical re-search, tor liistoiici/Jng niuteri;il which never claimed tobe historical, and for not taking into account the develop-ment of (hetiospel (radilion. Bnt while reempha.siziii»j;theimportance ofthe hi.stoncal-critical method, the instruc-tion also insists that hiiilicul inteipretation cannot be re-dnced to a hypercritital anuly.sis. bnt must always take-place within the living tradition oi the church—it.s liturgi-cal life, its contemplative reading ofthe sacred texts (lectioflicina) and its pa.storal care.

H( )W SCRinTIRE IS to be interpreted reniiuns acritical issue. With the collapse ofthe Refnnna-tions "'sola Scriptura" principle in the post-En-lightenment period. Protestantism has too often

heen left with the alternatives of a fundamentalist litentl-isni, with its modern doetrine of hihlical inerrancy or infal-lihility, and theological liberalisin. Many conservativeProtestant chnrche.s, lacking an ofiective magisterinm.cling to their inerrantist approach, fearfnl of what they seeas the slippery slope toward liberiUlsni [a.s I learned from

The Council on Christian Unityofthe Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

and the School of Theology for the Laity present

living the Ecumenical Story:Vignettes and Visions

The «th BiennialJoe A. and Nancy Vaughn BtalcupLcclure on Christian Unity

Deborah DeWinterlortbf L!.S. 0/fice

of the World Council of Churches

Sunday. June 12, 2005 at 3 pmNorthway Christian Church (Disciplfs of Christ)7202 W. NorthwestDallas, TexasReception

_CAHjncilChnstian

for more information: www.disciplts.org/i.cu or 317.71.3.2586

my five years as a participant in conversations betweenCatholics and Southern Baptists). Catholic theologians af-firm the role ofthe magisteriiiin in safeguarding thechnrchs faith, as the C^atliolic Theological Society ofAmerica's board (jf directors did in its statement on theCDF's intervention in the case oi Haight.

As Christianity becomes ever more diverse, given its in-credible growth in A.sia and the global south, noted byPbilip Jenkins in The Neiv Christimdom, the need for atnily collegial. nni\er.sai niagisterinm becomes ever moreapparent. The iJternative is a furtlier fragmentation oftheglobal Christian community. Ten.sions between newerchurches and more established ones are ahvady e\idcnt.

For e.xaniple, the rapid groui:li of Pentecostiili.siii in thesouthern iiemisphere and of nontraditional Africanehnrches, variously kniiwu as African Indigenon.s or.'Vfrican Independent Cliurc-hes, means that the Protes-tantism of the future will reflect the more participativefree-church tradititju. The worldwide .\uglican ('ominu-nion is presently experiencing tension and possibleschism over the ordination of a noneelibate gay bishop bythe Epi.scopal Dioce.se of New Hampshire, which hasbeen strongly protested by the Anglican hi.shops of Africa.

The Catholic churclies of . sia are showing a new matu-rit\'. vvitli tiieir owii sense of how to address their issues.Peter Phan notes that at Bangkok in 1982 ami Baiulnng,Indonesia, in 1990, the Federation of Asian Bishops' con-

ferences sought to construct an eccle.siolog\'that makes not the chuich hut the reign of Codthe center of Christian life. At the 1998 SyTiodof Bisliops for Asia, representatives objectedthat the Rotnan-draited outline document for(he synod was too Western in its approacli.Mncli ofthe controversy centered on how bestto prochiim the gospel in an A.sian context. TheIndian bishops argned for the right of localchinches to develop their own approach toevangelization. Their concern was with howChrist is proclaimed.

Many objected that the Roman emphasis onproclaiming Christ as universal savicjr was nota good .starting point in an .Asian context, view-ing it as ignoring the considerable e.\perienceof their conferences and putting other reli-gions at a disadvantage, Their own approacheniplia.si/.e.s a "triple dialogue"—with other re-ligions, with cultures and witli t!ie poor, ln hisexhortation "Ecclesia iu Asia" Pope John PaulII sought to incorjK)rate some of tiie hi.shops'concerns. Bnt remaining tensions resulted inthe 2000 declaration ofthe CDF. Doininuslesii.s, which .stressed tiiat the fnllness oi'Clod'srevelation is to be found in Christ, that it is notcomplemented by other religions, that mem-bers of other religions are iu a "gravely defi-cient situation." and that Christ has au ahso-lnte and universal significance.

Finally, the case of Father Haight raises witlia new clarity the question ofthe role of academ-

CHRtSTIAN CENTURY May3,2005 30

ie theolog)'. Tlie dilemma faced bv tlie CDF is notto tiie Catholic Church. Proiessional theolog) has both acritical and a speculative function; it probes the adecjuacyof tiie chnrch "s language and seeks to Hnd new. more effec-tivc ways to express its timeless truths, precise!)- lor thesake of tbe church's mission.

But the (juestion of liow theologians teaching in semi-naries and nndergraduate univensities cany ont their re-sponsibility to bring .students to an adult appreciation ofthe iaitli. botii iiitelieetnally and pastoralK; has not alwa\'sf)eeii adeijnately atldressed, II is not sufficient to argnethat theology is different from catechesis, as many aca-demic theologians do. Do not tliese(iieologians liave an obligation toiiaiul on the fuitli it.self and not jn.stthe speculations of an academy toooften driven hy the need to pnhli.sh?Oo they iiave no responsibility for thereligion.s development ol their stu-dents?

The department in which I teachis strongly committed to the reli-gious mission of our university andits members to tlie life of thecimrch, In an age when many havecalled attention to the religious andtheological illiteracy of many young

adnlt Catholics, u recent comment of onr students is\ery telling. When surveyed bv a laeiilty conimitlee re-viewing the program for theology majors, they respond-ed that tiiey "had hoen better iustruc ted iu modern andpostmodern developments and eriticjiies ol tiie traili*tion than in the tradition itself."

If tlie CDFs dctision to prohibit Roger Maight fromteaching ;LS a (.Catholic theologian is tronhliug. it is wortiinoting tiiat he has not been silenced; he will continue todo research and to publish. Hisyf'.vnv. St/nihol of God re-mains a work that other theologian.s will ha\e to dealwith. •

Clinical Pastoral EducationResidencies Available for2005-2006 at St. Mary'sBay Area CPE Center

St. M;iry's B:iy Area CPE Center. S:HIFr;incisc(). CA. will have IS year-loni: (4iinils) Clinical Pastoral Hdiicutiunresidency post lions open beginningSeptember 6. 200.''. through September \5.201)6. $25,000 stipend provided. $4(10 tu-iuon/CPF unit. Cliniciil assignments arcavailahle al Sl. M;iry's and Saint FrancisMemorial Hospitals in San Francisco andSequoia Hospital in Redwood Cily,providing a full range of medical servicessuch as cardiology, spinal care, oncology.maternity and women's services, ortho-pedics, rchahilitalion. skilled nursing,neuropsychiatry. adolescent psychiatry,hurn treatmeni unit, and emergency care.

Msit our wcbsiti- at:http://www.chwhealth.com/spiritualcare/cpe

Inlercsted inilividiiuis should upply to:Tlie Rev. Dr. Michcle MerchantManager of CPESt. Mary's Medical Center450 Stanyan StreetSan Francisco. CA 94117Phone: 415-7.S0-5718Fax;41.'i-75O-8I26.R-mail: mnierchan@chw.edu

Doing Good Feels Good. Volunteer.We're asking. People tell us they don't volunteerbecause they haven't been asked. You are neededright now, right in your neighborhood. As a SeniorCompanion you spend time with a homebound seniorwho needs a helping hand with day-to-day living tasks,10 stay independent. You benefit, too. You'll receive asmall stipend, but the richest rewards are the smiles andcompanionship you'll share — and the satisfaction you'llfeel. Call today, we're asking for your help.

Call 1-800-424-8867TDD: 1-800-833-3722www.seniorcompanions.org

Serve Your Community.

Be a Senior Companion.

31 CHRISTIAN CENTURY Mav3.2005