Introducing Theological Method: A Survey of Contemporary Theologians and Approaches

by Mary M. Veeneman

Sound theological method is a necessary prerequisite for good theological work. This accessible introduction surveys contemporary theological methodology by presenting leading thinkers of the 20th and 21st centuries as models. The book presents the strengths and weaknesses in each of the major options. Rather than favoring one specific position, it helps students of theology think critically so they can understand and develop their own theological method.

Genres: Theology, Nonfiction, Academic

208 pages, Paperback

First published November 7, 2017

Reviews

[Sam Nesbitt · Rating 4 out of 5]

In her valuable study, Introducing Theological Method: A Survey of Contemporary Theologians and Approaches, Mary M. Veeneman, associate professor of biblical and theological studies at North Park University, provides a helpful outline of major categories of Christian theological methodology, along with key figures and texts that represent such categories. Veeneman splits her work into eight main chapters, the first being a more general investigation into the work of theology, and then the following seven each addressing a different category of theological method: ressourcement and neo-orthodox theologies, theologies of correlation, postliberal theologies, evangelical theologies, political theologies, feminist theologies, and theologies of religious pluralism and comparative theology.

In her first chapter, Veeneman provides the most basic definition of theology (i.e., as provided by Alister McGrath: talking about God), and briefly describes the goals, starting points, and sources of theology. These three categories can make up the most basic components of theological method; put differently, when one answers, “What is the goal of your theology?” “From where does your theologizing start?” and “What sources are you using?” one has the majority of the foundation of his theological method established.

From this initial chapter, Veeneman begins her analysis of different theological methodologies, beginning with theologies of ressourcement and neo-orthodoxy, wherein she analyses Avery Dulles, Karl Barth, and Wolfhart Pannenberg. Veeneman brings these two categories together, along with their representatives, because according to her, “both movements seek to recover older doctrines or beliefs that had been central at earlier stages of the church’s history and were perceived to be forgotten in the modern era. Additionally, both movements seek to use their various retrievals to create a theology that speaks more clearly to the contemporary person” (15). Although Veeneman finds the mission of theological retrieval to be the common denominator between ressourcement and neo-orthodoxy, it should be pointed out that some have argued that neo-orthodoxy only does this in a superficial way. One theologian who makes this argument is John Frame, who in his estimation contends that neo-orthodoxy manifests what he calls that conservative drift, which is when a figure or school of thought utilizes traditional terminology, but redefines crucial terms to incorporate new dimensions that are not so orthodox. Neo-orthodoxy, therefore, may not be as centered on retrieval as Veeneman makes it out to be, especially when compared to ressourcement, which is a theological method that makes retrieval foundational to the theological enterprise.

Veeneman then moves to theologies of correlation, wherein she analyzes the Protestant theologian Paul Tillich, and the Catholic theologians Karl Rahner, and Bernard Lonergan. According to Veeneman, “theologies of correlation are fundamentally interested in dialogue. This dialogue is often found between the church and the broader world and between theology and other disciplines, be they philosophy, literature, the social sciences, or the natural sciences” (35).

Following this chapter is her treatment on postliberal theologies, whose representatives are George Lindbeck and Hans Frei. Postliberal theologies, so summarizes Veeneman, are characterized by the rejection of propositionalism, foundationalism, and experientialism. Instead of these theories of truth and methodologies, postliberal theologians center the methods upon the role of the community and the language it contains and uses to inculcate a specific identity. Doctrine is learned as a language is learned in the culture one grows up in.

Veeneman’s fifth chapter addresses evangelical theologies, and include Millard Erickson as a conservative evangelical theologian, Stanley Grenz as a more progressive evangelical theologian who appropriates the insights of postliberal theologian, George Lindbeck, Kevin Vanhoozer, a moderate-conservative Reformed evangelical theologian, and Clark Pinnock, a progressive evangelical theologian best known for his open theism. All of these theologians, argues Veeneman, are evangelical because they are committed to the methodological primacy of the Bible in the task of theology.

Veeneman’s final three chapters slightly shift in their approach, emphasizing movements more than particular individuals. As we will note below, this is particularly evident by the amount of historical context she provides for the movements and individuals that represent these movements. She first analyzes political theologies, namely theologies of liberation and black theology. The former is represented by Gustavo Gutierrez and the latter is represented by James Cone. Then, in chapter seven, she discusses feminist theologies, represented by Elizabeth Johnson and womanist (i.e., black feminist) theologian Delores Williams. Lastly, she discusses theologies of pluralism and comparative theology. Her analyses in this chapter are unique in that there is no specific section devoted to a particular theologian or representative thinker, and therefore this chapter is most movement-oriented.
Perhaps one of the most striking observations that the reader can garner from Veeneman’s work are not the differences between each method, but rather the commonalities. Perhaps the best and clearest example of this is the problem of relating the past to the present. Put in more theological terms, it is the problem of how past doctrinal formulations can be meaningful for the contemporary church. This problem is made central in methods of correlation, but it is also a problem recognized by ressourcement and neo-orthodox theologies (Dulles and Barth), postliberal theology (Lindbeck), evangelical theology (Grenz) and political theology (black theology, i.e., Cone). If such a problem transcends multiple divergent methods, then it seems to speak to a problem intrinsic to theology as a discipline, irrespective of methodology.

As mentioned above, Veenman provides helpful, but uneven, contextualization. For example, liberation, black, and feminist theologies receive disproportionately larger sections regarding context compared to the rest. This in turn leads to more general descriptions of methodological matters for these thinkers and their methods; there seems to be a qualitative difference between her methodological analyses of Rahner, Grenz, and Vanhoozer in terms of detailed matters in methodology compared to her treatments of liberation theology and black theology, which seemed to be more oriented towards introducing the reader to the distinctives of those theologies as a whole, rather than a detailed analysis of their respective methodologies.

Another more significant issue is the limitations of some of the analyses. For example, Veeneman omits describing speech-act theory in her treatment of Vanhoozer’s theological and hermeneutical methodology, while nonetheless using some of the terminology that derives from speech-act theory (e.g., “illocutionary acts of the author” [104]). For two more examples: 1) when discussing black and feminist theology, there is no discussion about standpoint epistemology, which is crucial for understanding why the voices of black women, to use the womanist example, are understood to be intrinsically important to listen to in the task of theology; 2) Pinnock’s four sources of theological methodology (Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience) are not connected to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral when they ought to be. For at least some of her analyses, therefore, she omits very significant historical and philosophical precursors or influences that directly impact the methodology of the school or figure under analysis.

Nonetheless, Veeneman has provided an invaluable resource for introducing students to a wide breadth of theological prolegomena and method that would take students years to initially grasp.

[Alex Grabb · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading this book. It was quite readable. A good overview without too much jargon for those just starting to explore different theological approaches.

Would have given 4 stars, but the lack of more recent Pentecostal/third article theology approaches seem like a big miss to me. If the book were to be updated I would recommend adding a chapter for these methods, and maybe one for the analytic theology movement.

[Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book, Mary Veeneman introduces readers to various theological trajectories and movements from the 20th and 21st centuries so that they'll have better familiarity with different trends in contemporary theology. A book like this helps students understand these various theological trends, with clear prose, and largely without editorial comment from the author—plus, under 200 pages. In this sense, Veeneman is to be commended.

That being the case, I have some small quibbles. For instance, I understand the need for brevity, but I think the book would be strengthened by starting with Schleiermacher—the first theologian to spend time discussing method before their dogmatic project—and then working through theologians like Ritschl, Troeltsch, and Harnack. Starting with Barth, with no background to these 19th c. German theologians, is a weakness in my opinion.

In addition, I was also surprised that Veeneman didn't cover the kind of "Hodge-Wayne Grudem-data selection" theology under the types of Evangelical theology. This type of theology certainly is out of vogue in many circles, but it's at least worth mentioning, even just to throw some jabs.

That being the case, I enjoyed this book and will recommend certain sections for folks to understand different types of theology that are perplexing at first glance.

[Audra Spiven · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was a REALLY surface-level survey of various theological schools of thought. I don't feel like I have a very competent grasp of the different schools after reading this book, but I WILL say that the chapters near the end on political theologies (South American liberation, black liberation, and feminist) made the whole book worth it. Veeneman does a good job giving a broad overview and fairly representing everyone's viewpoint (even the stupid ones).

[Caleb Moore · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall a helpful introduction to some important theologians and the common approaches to theology. I didn't find anything too special about the overall content but rather a helpful starting point for my methodology course

[Aldon Hynes · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this for a theology course in seminary. It seems like an adequate introduction but I suspect there are better introductions.