Neo-orthodoxy
1095328
225350195
2008-07-13T06:08:36Z
SmackBot
433328
Date the maintenance tags or general fixes
:''Neo-Orthodoxy can also refer to a form of [[Orthodox Judaism]] following the philosophy of "[[Torah im Derech Eretz]]", and can additionally refer to the ideas of late 20th century [[Eastern Orthodox]] theology, e.g. chiefly by [[Christos Yannaras]]''
'''Neo-orthodoxy''' is a term of opprobrium applied in various, sometimes contradictory ways to the theologies of a diverse group of [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[theology|theologians]] who thrived in the first half of the twentieth century, beginning in the aftermath of the [[First World War]] (1914-1918). Originally it was used to criticize the theology of [[Karl Barth]] as unduly conservative, allegedly importing an old orthodoxy into a changed situation in which it was no longer relevant. Later, [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] critics on the one hand and Protestant [[Fundamentalist Christianity|fundamentalist]] critics on the other began to use it as a near-synonym for [[Liberal Christianity|theological liberalism]]. More recently, the difficulty of applying the term constructively to any particular theologian has led increasingly to its abandonment as a useful classification.
==Problems Identifying Neo-Orthodox Theologians==
German-American theologian [[Paul Tillich]] first used the term neo-orthodox in a [[Christian Theology|Christian theological]] context, criticizing his Swiss colleague [[Karl Barth]] as too conservative for the contemporary situation: "In attempting to derive every statement directly from the ultimate truth... he falls into using a method which can be called 'neo-orthodox,' a method which has strengthened all trends toward a theology of repristination in Europe" ([[#Tillich1951|Tillich 1951, i, 5]]). David Tracy, a [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] advocate for [[pluralism]] in [[theology]], has even called Barth "''the'' neo-orthodox theologian," meaning by neo-orthodoxy a form of liberalism. ([[#Tracy1988|Tracy 1988, 27]]). The identification of Barth with one version of neo-orthodoxy or another is widely taken for granted in Anglo-American theology, but it is increasingly subjected to analysis and rejected. One scholar, who writes of "the myth of the neo-orthodox Barth," reports that German scholarship has reached consensus that the term is useless as a description of Barth's thought ([[#McCormack1995|McCormack 1995, 26-28]]).
Some scholars group Barth under this label together with other theologians, such as [[Emil Brunner]] (1889-1966) ([[#Tracy1988|Tracy 1988, 27]]). However, after a brief period of cooperation, Barth and Brunner were deeply critical and even hostile toward each other's work from 1929 until Brunner's death ([[#Busch1976|Busch 1976, 195]]), raising the question whether the two can meaningfully be grouped together.
This question is heightened when the term is applied to other theologians whose characteristic emphases were even more divergent. Some theologians believe that two brothers, [[Reinhold Niebuhr]] (1892-1971) and [[H. Richard Niebuhr]] (1894-1962), represented neo-orthodoxy in America ([[#Hall1998|Hall 1998]]). However, other recent scholarship, mostly from adherents of the [[postliberal]] position in present-day theological circles,{{Fact|date=July 2008}} has argued that Reinhold Niebuhr's claim to be [[Liberal Christianity|liberal]] is borne out by the content of his writing ([[#Hauerwas2001|Hauerwas 2001, 88]]).
Ironically, Tillich, who deployed the term to criticize Barth, was [[Petard|hoist with his own petard]], having been treated as among the neo-orthodox himself ([[#Hall1998|Hall 1998, 27-45]]).
==Emphases==
{{Unreferencedsection|date=June 2008}}
===Revelation===
There is a strong emphasis on the [[revelation]] of [[God]] by God as the source of Christian [[doctrine]]. [[Natural theology]] seeks knowledge of God through observation of nature or the use of human [[reason]], or both. Barth rejected natural theology. Brunner believed that natural theology still had an important role and this led to a sharp disagreement between the two men.
===Transcendence of God===
There is a stress on the [[transcendence (religion)|transcendence]] of God. Barth believed that the emphasis on the [[immanence]] of God had led human beings to imagine God to be ourselves writ large. He stressed the infinite qualitative distinction between the human and the divine.
===Existentialism===
Some of the theologians grouped together as neo-orthodox made use of [[existentialism|existentialist philosophy]]. [[Rudolf Bultmann]] (who was associated with Barth and Brunner in the 1920s in particular) was strongly influenced by his sometime colleague at Marburg, the German existentialist philosopher [[Martin Heidegger]]. Reinhold Niebuhr and (to a lesser extent) Karl Barth were influenced by the writings of the 19th century Danish philosopher [[Søren Kierkegaard]]. Kierkegaard was a critic of the liberal [[Modernist Christianity|Christian modernist]] effort to rationalise Christianity. Instead, under pseudonymous names such as [[Johannes Climacus]], he maintained that Christianity transcends human understanding and presents the individual with paradoxical choices. The decision to become a Christian is not a rational decision but a [[leap of faith]].
== Relation to Other Theologies ==
Neo-orthodoxy appears to serious theological students as very distinct from both [[Liberal Christianity|liberal Protestantism]] and [[Evangelical Christianity|evangelicalism]], though its language has much in common with the former, and doctrinally assents in part with the latter. Neo-orthodoxy draws off various Protestant traditions (chiefly [[Lutheran]] and [[Reformed]]) in an attempt to rehabilitate Christian [[dogma]]s largely outside the restraints of [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] thought.
== See also ==
* [[Christian existentialism]]
* [[Paleo-orthodoxy]]
==References==
<cite id=Busch1976>* Busch, E. (1976). ''Karl Barth: His Life from Letters and Autobiographical Texts''. Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. ISBN 0-8028-0708-9</cite>
<cite id=Hall1998>* Hall, D. J. (1998) ''Remembered Voices: Reclaiming the Legacy of "Neo-Orthodoxy"''. Louisville, Westminster John Knox. ISBN 0-664-25772-0</cite>
<cite id=Hauerwas2001>* Hauerwas, S. (2001). ''With the Grain of the Universe: The Church's Witness and Natural Theology.'' Grand Rapids, Brazos Press. ISBN 1-58743-016-9</cite>
<cite id=McCormack1995>* McCormack, B. (1995). ''Karl Barth's Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology''. New York, Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-826337-6</cite>
<cite =id#Tillich1951>* Tillich, P. 1951. ''Systematic Theology.'' Chicago, University of Chicago Press.</cite>
<cite id=#Tracy1988>* Tracy D. 1988. ''Blessed Rage for Order: The New Pluralism in Theology''. San Francisco, Harper & Row. ISBN 0-8164-2202-8</cite>
[[Category:Christian philosophy]]
[[Category:Christian theological movements]]
[[Category:Calvinist theology]]
[[da:Dialektisk teologi]]
[[de:Dialektische Theologie]]
[[ko:신정통주의]]
[[ia:Theologia dialectic]]
[[nl:Dialectische theologie]]
[[pt:Teologia dialética]]
[[sv:Dialektisk teologi]]
[[zh:新正統神學]]