View Alan Wade, The Theologian as Authentic Subject

306 Pages·2012·1.58 MB·English

by  Alan Wade

The Theologian as Authentic Subject
Lonergan and the Centrality of Method

by
Alan Wade
BTheol, G.Dip.R.E., TheolM.

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree of
Doctor of Theology

MCD University of Divinity
Melbourne, Australia
March 2012
Abstract

This thesis is concerned with understanding the relation between transcendent
fulfilment of human life through relation to God, as declared in Church teaching, and
finite fulfilment through knowing and loving.

It is dependent on the work of Bernard Lonergan SJ in arguing that understandings of
the cognitional connection between subjectivity and objectivity have direct
foundational implications for theology. Comparison and contrast is used to
demonstrate the effect of ‘conceptualist’ and ‘intellectualist’ approaches. Authenticity
of meanings and values is understood as resulting from sustained faithfulness to
transcendental precepts of being attentive, intelligent, reasonable and responsible.
Religious conversion, theology’s foundational reality, adds the further precept of
complete self-transcendence through unconditional being-in-love which involves
ongoing conversion towards authenticity and consistent renunciation of unauthenticity.

It is maintained that since conceptual formulations bear the marks of an originating
context, theology must always be contemporary and authenticity in regard to raising
and answering questions is vital, requiring openness to collaboration, further
knowledge, and further questions by religious traditions and theologians. The manner
in which Christian faith is held to be true is as fundamental as truth itself.

ii
Statement of Originality

I, Alan Wade, hereby certify that this thesis contains no material which has been
accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other
institution and affirm that to the best of my knowledge, the thesis contains no material
previously published or written by another person, except where due reference is made
in the text of the thesis.
7th March, 2012.

iii
Acknowledgements
This thesis would not have been possible without the patient and wise guidance of my
supervisor, Dr Kathleen Williams, RSM. For her encouragement, guidance, support
and friendship, I shall always be grateful.
I am also thankful to: the Melbourne College of Divinity for the grant of an Australian
Postgraduate Award and allowing additional time to complete the work; Faculty, staff
and students of Yarra Theological Union, who have constituted a stimulating and
nurturing community of learning that has been a blessing and privilege; Tony Kelly,
CSsR, for introducing me to the work of Bernard Lonergan and for guidance at a
critical time of transition; Dr Richard P Gerraty for medical advice; and Bernadette
Reeders for proof reading.
Finally, I acknowledge with profound thankfulness the love and support of Melita, my
partner in life, who has been a sustaining source of encouragement through difficulties
encountered on the way. My gratitude is far deeper than any words of mine can tell.

iv
Preface

The motivation for this thesis arises from an ongoing transformation of my self-
understanding as a subject in relation to God through acquaintance with the work of
Bernard Lonergan SJ. I have been enabled to understand a basic issue that had been
the cause of confusion, unease, and self-doubt for many years. Since recognition of
theology as the product of human minds is central to the thesis, this preface is an
introduction to relevant formative influences on the mind of the writer.
The thesis arises from reflection on experience that has involved three major changes
of ‘spiritual habitat’ or Christian tradition. The first major change was a decision to
leave the Christadelphians, the exclusive and fundamentalist sect to which my family
belonged, and become a Baptist. I received theological education, ministerial training,
and was ordained and served as a Minister in the Baptist church before being received
as a Minister of the Word in the Uniting Church. In what I pray is a final change, I
was received into the Catholic Church. This sequence of changes was entwined with
other profound changes in personal circumstances. It is a history that has been both
sad and sorry as well as energising and expansive. Because my story is ‘me’, and I
would not be who I am without it, I have no regrets about the changes of spiritual
habitat. Instead I feel profoundly grateful for the spirit of questioning that engendered
them and persisted with me despite the desire to settle down and rest.
Since the most influential formation is in childhood and youth, I will briefly indicate
something of that experience. Christadelphians are a small group that originated in the
mid-nineteenth century seceding from a movement known as Restorationism or
Christian Primitivism. Their self-understanding is one restoring the simple faith of the
first century ‘ecclesias’ and of having discovered ‘the Truth’ of ‘Bible teaching’. The
v
maintenance of a very limited horizon of thought, particularly in regard to scripture
and history, is regarded as a matter of faithfulness and a necessary part of being
‘separate from the world’.
When belonging to a faith community is a basic part of one’s identity embodied in
personal relationships, it is set in a large context. If renouncing the basis of faith of the
group means being cut off from all that is known and familiar, including people who
have been generous, supportive and influential in formative years, it can be easier to
suppress questions, the answers to which might cause such disruption, than pursue
them. Coming to the inevitable conclusion that the form of religious belief I had
inherited was basically erroneous was a process undertaken only fitfully and
reluctantly over years. Once the rejection of a tradition has taken place, there is
heightened awareness that religious self-identity is a matter of personal responsibility,
deliberation and choice. There is no stabilizing factor of “having always belonged”
that indicates an identity with a sense of shared communal responsibility and which
enables tensions and divisions to be more easily borne. A search begins for adequate
foundations capable of providing the basis of a religious identity that is in the process
of being formed.
My search took place with an in-built suspicion of propositional forms of expression of
religious belief that claimed to be certain truth. At the same time, the question of God
had also become the most important life question. Theological education, ministerial
training and pastoral ministry in the Baptist and Uniting Churches led to a personal re-
formation and an understanding that the realities of faith were known in a more direct,
embodied and personal way by many great figures in the history of the Church than I
had been prepared for in my childhood and youth. Theological reflection had then
vi
been a matter of correct understanding of formulations of doctrine and relating them to
one another within a very limited framework. The question of the relation of such
knowledge to lived experience was of little importance because assent to propositional
truth was vital for salvation. The only relation to ‘the Truth’ was that of a particular to
a universal. The proposition that “God loves all people”, invites recognition of being a
person and the logical conclusion “therefore, God loves me.” There was evidence in
the Bible and the influence of kind and generous people who assented to the
proposition. Faith was a rational decision and one lived “as if” it were the case,
regardless of experience. Indeed, the act of assent, of ‘having faith’, was purer or
more heroic if there was little or no consolation by way of experience when striving to
conform oneself to the obligations of being ‘in the Truth’.
Of course, there has to be some connection, otherwise belief is nonsensical. In my
judgment, the lived reality connecting Christadephians and their faith is “fellowship”.
One belongs to a group of simple, upright and kind people who provide a sense of
security by operating as a large extended family. Such a depth of acceptance and
support is rarely found and can be very attractive when discovered. The outward focus
emphasising “bible teaching” and “right doctrine” provides a framework for group
identity that notionally assures observant members of their relation to God, eternal life,
and the world. Discipline concerned with maintaining doctrinal purity ensures a group
solidarity necessary to provide such mutual support. Since one’s experience is always
understood in the light of a tradition in which one has been formed, or has adopted, the
benefits of belonging are easily equated with the soundness of the professed beliefs.
This leads to tacit agreement not to explore questions that might query those beliefs. If
the horizon of understanding is severely limited, and being a person of faith is equated
with maintaining that limitation, a circle is completed that encloses the whole of life
vii
and deals with all relevant questions. Other questions are of no real concern or interest
or are evidence of ‘falling away from the Truth’.
The situation described may be extreme but in my experience the same basic ‘spirit’
can be found across the broad spectrum of Christian churches. Often I have
encountered concern for a ‘correct’ theological approach that is held to take
appropriate account of all necessary factors and considerations. Formal and informal
groupings centre around many such ‘correct’ approaches. Group identities are
delineated in terms defining one approach over against opposing views. Certain
questions are considered important and others are marginalised as being of little or no
concern. To ask them is to betray either ignorance or a leaning toward a position that
has been excluded and belongs to the territory of another group. The understanding of
being related to God and engaged with theology is primarily through a tradition and a
conceptual framework of choice or, as Lonergan once described it, as “substance”
rather than “subject”.
Eventually, the following questions emerged: What is the connection between human
living and relation to God? How does, and how should, theology take account of the
human subject? Why does the Church often seem to seek to neglect or supress the
subject? Only in more recent years have I begun to understand that answers to such
questions are dependent on answers to questions about human understanding and
knowing. Thus began the journey that has led to this thesis.

viii
God guard me from those thoughts men think
In the mind alone;
He that sings a lasting song
Thinks in a marrow-bone.
W.B. Yeats, from A Prayer for old Age.

This, then, brought our new making. Much emotional stress … Call it conversion;
but the word can’t cover such good. It was like being in love with ambient
blessedness ... In love with life transformed … life breathed afresh, though yet half
understood. There had been many byways for the frustrate brain, all leading to
illusions lost and shrines forsaken … One road is before us now, one guidance for
our gain, one morning light – whatever the world’s weather – wherein wide-eyed to
waken.
Siegfried Sassoon, from Lenten Illuminations.

With the drawing of this Love and the voice of this Calling
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
T.S. Eliot, from Little Gidding, Four Quartets

ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………….…..II
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY…………………………………………………..III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................ IV

PREFACE…………………………………………………………………………….V
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................... X
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER ONE BEING HUMAN, AUTHENTICITY AND THEOLOGY .......... 6
1.1 A theological inquiry into being human and related to God .......................................................... 6
1.2 Presuppositions ................................................................................................................................... 7
1.3 The wider present context of the inquiry ....................................................................................... 13
1.4 Theology and the human mind ....................................................................................................... 16
1.5 Knowing and Loving ........................................................................................................................ 19
1.6 Theology of the head and heart ....................................................................................................... 25
1.7 Theory and Theology ....................................................................................................................... 32
CHAPTER TWO THE INTELLECTUALIST POSITION OF AQUINAS AND
ITS THEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE AS EXPLICATED BY BERNARD
LONERGAN .................................................................................................... 37
2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 37
2.2 Background and Outline of Lonergan’s Main Thesis .................................................................. 40
2.3 Subject and Soul ............................................................................................................................... 45
2.4 The Inner Word in Direct Understanding and Definition ........................................................... 48
2.4.1 Questions that seek understanding of a cause or reason ............................................................. 48
2.4.2 Insight into Phantasm .................................................................................................................. 50
2.4.3 Emanatio Intelligibilis ................................................................................................................. 51
2.5 The Inner Word in Reflective Understanding and Judgment ..................................................... 56
2.5.1 The synthetic element in judgment – composition or division ................................................... 56
2.5.2 Judgment as the positing of the synthesis ................................................................................... 58
2.6 Wisdom .............................................................................................................................................. 60
x