'Open-ended distinctiveness': the contemporary relevance of Wolfhart Pannenberg's participatory ecclesiology and ecumenism for World Christianity
View/ Open
Wen2019.pdf (1.694Mb)
Date
29/11/2019Item status
Restricted AccessEmbargo end date
31/12/2100Author
Wen, Clement Yung
Metadata
Abstract
This thesis contributes to the wider discussion surrounding the viability of the
emerging theological paradigm of ‘World Christianity’ by arguing that Wolfhart
Pannenberg’s participatory ecclesiology and ecumenism are of ongoing critical and
constructive relevance for the movement—not so much from the angle of
Pannenberg’s programmatic relationship to the twentieth-century ecumenical
movement that centred upon the ‘visible unity’ of the churches around the Lord’s
Table, but instead from the angle of the various ways in which his ecclesiological
and ecumenical thought not only maintained a necessary ‘distinctiveness’ to both
Christianity and the church in the world, but also an ‘open-endedness’ that allowed
for genuine possibilities for the contextualizing of Christian faith and its ecclesial
expression. Whereas the paradigm of World Christianity has, to date, prioritized the
notion of ‘open-endedness’ through its emphasis upon that which is local, particular,
and also often ‘marginal’, some within the movement are beginning to realize a need
to recover a greater sense of Christianity’s definitional boundaries. What Pannenberg
models through his eschatologically-oriented and historically-rooted programme is
not only a thought-through ‘open-endedness’ for Christian and ecclesial expression,
but importantly, a requisite emphasis upon the definitional ‘distinctiveness’ of
Christian and ecclesial identity as well. Along such lines, the main argument of the
present study is that a critically constructive consideration of Pannenberg’s
eschatologically-oriented and historically-rooted ecclesiological and ecumenical
concerns and proposals can, in both direct and indirect ways, aid World Christianity
in its maturation as a theological paradigm—one that is very much poised to
definitively mark the twenty-first century.
Towards that end, the thesis begins in chapter one with a broad-brushstroke
account of how ecclesiology—from the time of its inception as its own theological
loci around the time of the Protestant Reformation on to the present era of World
Christianity—has continued to ‘widen’ in a manner that has blurred certain requisite
distinctions which are needed in order for Christianity and the church to retain their
inherent meaning and significance. Because a critically constructive consideration of
Pannenberg’s participatory ecclesiological and ecumenical proposals in their ‘openended distinctiveness’ is being suggested as a corrective to this conundrum, in
chapter two, the biographical and socio-historical context of Pannenberg’s
eschatologically-oriented and historically-rooted ecclesiological and ecumenical
thought are traced to show how the themes of ‘open-endedness’ and ‘distinctiveness’
came to be concerns which underlay his programme. Chapter three then seeks to
show how Pannenberg’s eschatological orientation for ecclesiology was expressed
by his Vatican II-inspired rendition of ‘the church as sign and tool of the kingdom’
(i.e., his ‘sign-signified’ distinction) and especially his conception of the church’s
‘ecstatic participation’ in the gospel and the sacraments. Along the way, with
reference to the definitional problems facing the emerging theological paradigm of
World Christianity, it is argued that the theme of ‘participation in Christ’ ought to be
the minimum baseline for all of Christianity, for such a theme not only safeguards
the ‘distinctiveness’ of the faith and its ecclesial expression but is also applicable in
an ‘open-ended’ way. Further, it is contended that the robustness of Pannenberg’s
participatory formulations make him a worthy conversation partner for World
Christianity to constructively engage with. Such a conversation continues in chapter four, which is focused on ‘church
and world’. Attention in this chapter is drawn to Pannenberg’s negative reception of
liberation theology to highlight how his eschatologically-oriented ‘sign-signified’
distinction continues to be of critical relevance for the World Christianity paradigm
that, at present, is predominantly marked by a liberationist ethos. In this vein,
Pannenberg’s ‘sign-signified’ distinction serves not only to safeguard Christian and
ecclesial ‘distinctiveness’ but also the church’s evangelistic missionary task to the
world. At the same time, Pannenberg’s other proposals regarding ‘church and world’,
though vague in terms of concreteness and therefore practical applicability, will
nevertheless also be shown to be of constructive ‘open-ended’ relevance for World
Christianity—ironically through his ‘Constantinianism’ and more directly by way of
his notion of ‘creative love’. That said, amidst the chapter’s discussion, it will also be
suggested that Pannenberg’s programme would benefit from an increased attention to
and further development of his mostly latent ‘social’ thought-structure—this, for the
purpose of more effectively complementing the thought-structure of his ‘Christian
personalism’ that is more explicitly on display.
Finally, in chapter five, Pannenberg’s historical-rootedness for ecclesiology
and ecumenism is displayed through an expository treatment of his view of
contextualization and of his view that the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381
ought to be seen as bearing universal ecumenical significance. A direct engagement
with the World Christianity paradigm then follows through a brief dialogue with
Dale Irvin’s programmatic work, Christian Histories, Christian Traditioning (1998),
which features a ‘genealogical’ methodology for history and a proposal for the
Christian tradition to be redrawn by way of a ‘rhizomatic’ rather than a ‘tree-like’
structure. The dialogical section with Irvin argues that if one is required at present to
choose between ‘Global Christianity’ and ‘World Christianity’, then on theological
grounds, the former is the only option. The thesis then concludes with a short
summary of its main points and key advances.