INTRODUCTION: THEOLOGY OF CULTURE AS THEOLOGICAL HUMANISM

Author(s): David E. Klemm

Source: Literature and Theology, Vol. 18, No. 3 (September 2004), pp. 239-250
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23926049
Accessed: 28-01-2020 22:24 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Literature and Theology

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Literature & Theology, Vol. 18. No. 3, September 2004, pp. 239-230

INTRODUCTION: THEOLOGY
OF CULTURE AS THEOLOGICAL
HUMANISM*
David E. Klemm

According to its own mission statement, 'Literature and Theology provi

forum for interdisciplinary dialogue, inviting both close textual analysis
broader theoretical speculation as ways of exploring how religion is embe
within culture'. Traditionally speaking, theology of culture has been th
theological subdiscipline which aims at identifying, analysing, and interpreti
religious meaning in the various domains of socio-cultural life: science,
literature, politics, economics, education, law, etc. Theology of culture
be done in many ways, but in every case its strength is in working up
of categories for interpreting the religious or theological meanings expr
within the various domains of human culture. It is longstanding in wo
history, claiming some of the most illustrious names in history. In term
audience, theology of culture appeals to thinkers both within relig
traditions (Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.) and outsid
them—thinkers who sense that autonomous cultural productions re
ultimate questions and disclosures that are 'religious' in substance. Rev
the categories and methods of theology of culture is an ongoing task, bec
both theological thinking and cultural realities are ever-changing. Likew
what is meant by Buddhist or Christian humanism, and so forth, is ever
ever changing. Today we are in dire need for a new approach to religio
traditions and to normative religious thinking (theology) so that we m
respond with insight to our rapidly changing cultural and social situation
The following set of essays makes an initial attempt to do just that
considering or enacting the possibilities for a renewed theology of cul
conceived as 'theological humanism'. The contributors walk with humil
and trepidation in this direction—well aware of the difficulties and pitf
that lie ahead of the undertaking. Nonetheless, the contributors are imp
by the urgency of confronting the fundamental challenges in our time to th
possibilities of sustainable life on this planet and to a human life worth livin
The most chastening recognition in this enterprise is that we humans ar
problem and the possibility, and the scale and scope of the problem ar
Literature & Theology Vol 18 No. 3 © Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved.

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 240 INTRODUCTION

but overwhelming even as the poss

silent, not by choice but by sheer
to anguished cries of rage and frus
a new way of thinking, speaking, a
issues that confront us. The essays th
a first step of a path that is unmar
begin we must. Why a theological

I. WHY THEOLOGICAL HUMANISM?

Theological humanism addresses the current situation

fold commitment. First, theological humanism, as a
doing theology of culture, commits itself to human w
of exclusivist claims by religious communities and
with triumphal voices to cultural domination, theol
to recover the humanistic tradition in a defence of t
of human life. To do so, it wants to move theology
tion of ethics and humanistic criticism.1 The new c
theological situation we occupy calls for ethical clar
behalf of our shared human life on an embattled pl
the threat and the threatened.
This insight has global and trans-traditional scope. The Dalai Lama
recently wrote that people everywhere seek to be happy and to avoid
suffering, and that we should all have compassion for others with the
same goal in mind. With respect to achieving that goal, the Dalai Lama
writes, 'I have come to the conclusion that whether or not a person is
a religious believer does not matter much. Far more important is that
they be a good human being.'2 That is not to say that positive, religious
belief is a bad or undesirable thing. For many people, participation in
a historical religious community is an excellent thing that helps to enable
their well-being. However, we will never reach our common humanity
only or exclusively through the particular teachings of particular religions.
Theological humanism takes its starting point therefore in ethical concerns
of real moral agents living in a confused and confusing world for which
we must all take responsibility. Stated otherwise, in an age of violent
and virulent religiosity, a theological humanist insists on the religious truth
of self-criticism in care for the other.
Second, theological humanism is an ardently faithful stance in life. A
theological humanist gives equal weight to the commitment to understand,
analyse, interpret, and defend the theological depth of meaning in humanity's
many cultural projects and dynamics. Human beings have a spiritual capacity

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DAVID E. KLEMM 241

to long for and respond to divine tr

and response manifests itself in their m
experiences in the historical religion
and theological humanism engages it
in real life. Theological humanism d
'ultimate concern', or 'the feeling o
both for the genuine differences ma
and for the particularities of differe
ism would rather place religion wit
its power and meaning as it appear
culture.

Theological humanism is a norma

integrity of human life in its moral
such it embraces multiple methodol
to find confessional, philosophical, lite
that interpret the theological meanin
is in fact the case with the essays th
Theology.
In the set of essays that follow, we begin with William Schweiker's
rather programmatic statement on 'Theological Humanism and the Ethics
of Responsibility'. This essay is the lead piece for the set. Read it as
articulating the scope and nature of the project. In the four essays that
follow it, four very different scholars have responded to the proposal of
a reclaimed theology of culture as theological humanism by relating their
own work to the project. Maria Antonaccio is a philosopher and ethicist,
who has written extensively on Iris Murdoch. She contributes 'Iris
Murdoch's Secular Theology of Culture'. David E. Klemm is a philoso
phical theologian, who has written on hermeneutics in theology and
philosophy and who has strong interests in literature and art. He con
tributes "'The Darkness Inside the Human Soul": Human Uncertainty in
Theological Humanism and Michael Frayn's Play Copenhagen'. Dale S.
Wright is a scholar of Buddhism, especially Chinese and Japanese Zen
Buddhism, but also a student of Western philosophy and theology. He
contributes 'Human Responsibility and the Awakening of Character in the
Buddhist Film Mandala\ Finally, Glenn Whitehouse is a scholar of cultural
hermeneutics, especially in the thought of Paul Ricoeur, which he applies
to cinema and other forms of expression. He contributes 'Unimaginable
Variations: Christian Responsibility in the Cinema of Broken Identity'.
These are first attempts to define and enact theology of culture as theo
logical humanism. The door is open for contributions. We hope that
others will participate in the project from their own theological and
human standpoints.

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
242 INTRODUCTION

Why theological humanism? Beca

thinking is both warranted by our
thinking, and it is demanded in an a
and global endangerment. In ou
continues a legacy in how to thin
namely, the theology of culture. L

II. THE LEGACY OF THE THEOLOGY OF CULTURE

Augustine (354—430) can be credited as the first theol

to the principles of a methodical interpretation of rel
the sphere of cultural domains. On Christian Doctrin
'historically the most influential work of hermeneut
(especially Book XV) remains an indispensable guide t
word', a language of the heart, which is distinct from
'outer word'. The outer word is made up of the signs
word may be embodied or translated. The inner word
original thinking and speaking, purely intellectual an
its articulation in a particular and historical language
relationship of identity in difference between inner word
Augustine theological. Christ as the Divine Word that e
at a particular time and place is similarly distinct from (y
the Word that was with God from all eternity.4 With
bequeaths the principles for interpreting an inner, th
the basis of outer, cultural meanings.
In the modem era, Friedrich Schleieiermacher (17
translator of Plato who helped to found the Universi
theology of culture in a post-Kantian philosophical con
Revolutionary political context. In Schleiermacher'
word' of Augustine becomes 'feeling' or 'immediate co
plays somewhat of an ambiguous role in Schleierma
can either be objective (empirical, a feeling of somethin
or subjective (transcendental, an immediate, accompany
knowing, doing, or feeling, pure and simple). The lat
consciousness can accompany any other form of cons
an objective feeling. Religion is a qualification of such
consciousness, namely, 'the feeling of absolute depende
same thing, of being in relation with God'. God is no
a relationship; religious feeling is not objective feelin
'Whence of our receptive and active existence, as
consciousness.' The self is a cipher of divine transcend

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DAVID E. KLEMM 243

sense of religion as the 'feeling of

appearance in any cultural domain, an
of interpretation for such appearances.8
There are many the inheritors of th
stemming from Schleiermacher, inclu
Paul Tillich, as well as such thinkers
Bernard Meland, process theologians,
these authors contributed significant
Tillich stands out among them. With
Society in Germany entitled 'On the
defines a form of theological thinkin
a depth dimension of meaning in c
autonomy of the cultural domain.9 In
meaning-giving depth (Gehalt) of cultu
In order to give some precision i
gious meaning embedded in autonom
the distinction between surface form
substance in his early theology of cu
or import is grasped by means of
content.'11 'Form' refers to the (logic
on the subject-side of the subject-o
and expressive form in a work of vis
the material given to sense experie
object relationship. 'Substance', 'depth
unconditioned ground of the form-
Tillich writes, 'Content is accidental,
mediating element.'12
The possible relations among form
typologies of cultural styles for Tilli
form combined with material conten
religious culture, depth meaning pre
tation. Classical culture is the balan
religious. In any of these basic styles,
the form and content of a work in
or mystery of things in their norm
form and content of the work, illum
a naturalistic appearance of depth
ground of being' can break through
disturbing them. For Tillich, this seco
is characteristic of the 20th centu
Expressionist art held a supreme plac
do just that.

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 244 INTRODUCTION
III. RECONCEIVING THE THEOLOGY OF CULTURE

Today the discourse of theology of culture must be reconc

I will at least mention some of the developments that
theology of culture as 'theological humanism'.

A. Cultural Changes
First, the cultural situation has changed enormously
the 20th century. Consider, for example, the obvious
is postcolonial, global, and postmodem, in ways theolo
fully realised a half-century ago. As one would expect
Tillich's theology of culture have arisen on the groun
Consider the following.
Culture in the last half-century has generated a plu
bursts any simplistic typology and confounds any att
dominant or leading style. Given the postcolonial, glo
conditions of contemporary culture, experimentalism
teleology disappears behind the pluralism of styles. E
condition is heightened reflexivity. As Robert P. Scha
is styled today is style. 'Through all styles the per
another style of the same order as expressionism, but a
which to use the first-order styles—in other words a
reflexivity of styles.'14 A revised theology of culture
conceptuality and technical terminology to engage the
of cultural styles.
Second, technological culture is exploding in a wa
not have anticipated. William Schweiker writes convinc
this volume about the 'overhumanising of the world'
power with which it confronts us. Schweiker is con
of technological power to dehumanise the world. The i
is that dehumanisation occurs through overhumanisat
of human power into the world that dehumanise
Overhumanisation is not simply a matter of over-dev
we find no 'outside' to our sprawling urban and subur
a matter of the enormous reach and influence of media, w
of images and messages through countless new gadgets,
and pocket computers. Soon we may all be carrying c
bodies. What limits can there be to such overhumanisation? What is the
religious meaning of overhumanisation? Clearly we are confronted with the
uncanny presence of an agency appearing through and with primary human
agency—namely, the agency of technology as overhumanisation. Can a
revised theology of culture address this issue?

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DAVID E. KLEMM 245
Related to the threat of overhumanisation is the undeniable cultural fact

of wanton human exploitation of nature. Despoilation of 'natural' places

through overpopulation, encroachment of human habitation, and availability
of such things as off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, and the like, abound. Oil
supplies are depleting world wide as demand for gasoline rises with the trend
toward larger SUV-type vehicles and the principle 'one person, one car'.
Water and air pollution continue unabated, so that we can no longer count
on fresh water or clear air to sustain life on the planet. Reduction of natural
species also continues, as humans disrupt the environments of the non-human
animals, who share this planet. Political leaders still deny the force of global
warming, which threatens life on earth in ways we can hardly imagine.
A reconceived theology of culture must address the issues of exploitation
of nature and make sense of them theologically and ethically.
Finally, as Langdon Gilkey makes clear, 'We cannot consider the end
of the century without confronting its most immediate problem: ethnic
cleansing and the hordes and hordes of refugees, battered, raped, murdered,
and in the end driven out of their own space to a place they know not
where.'15 We can add to this issue, so urgent today, the declaration of
an endless war on terror, without clearly identifiable enemies with national
identities, and no sense of how the war could be won or how to measure
success. Subsidiary wars break out against nations, such as Iraq, thought to
be associated with the vague threats of terror and considered part of an
'axis of evil', according to a doctrine of pre-emptive war. War now haunts
our consciousness and conscience, as death tolls and devastation rise. With
war come the apprehension, detention, interrogation, and torture of
prisoners. At this writing, the images of abuse in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison
have just circulated, shaming all humanity. What is next? Can theological
humanism address the spectre of endless war, decimated cultures, war
crimes, and the suspension of the rights of prisoners and civilians granted
through the Geneva Convention? In some ways, all of these elements
seem to be spawned by insatiable greed on behalf of us humans. Can we
confront the question of human greed with theological reflection?16

B. Religious Changes
At the same time that the cultural situation changes so drastically, such that
even the concept of 'culture' becomes a hotly contested one, the religious
situation is also undergoing major changes world wide. Among the religious
changes are the following.
First, as is commonly pointed out, the last half-century witnesses the
appearance of undeniable, unavoidable religious pluralism. It is no longer
the case that we know abstractly and intellectually that the world has
a plurality of religious groups. Today, we live religious pluralism in our

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 246 INTRODUCTION

neighbourhoods, schools, and wo

and interact everyday with peop
commitments.17 What does it mea
by-side with people of diverse rel
negate, or render exclusivistic our
ments? If so, how can we live side
commitments? The question is
commitments are passionately hel
how humans should think and h
live comfortably with others who
most important questions? If we al
about religion or theology, then
and lacking in depth.
The traditional sociological princip
was that one society requires one
a common morality and practice, a
of morality. Is that principle false? D
democracy—not require a common
ability? Does common morality not
commitments? If the traditional p
society survive? If the traditional pri
Can a civil religion play that role
religions? Must positive religions
survive? These are all issues that
humanism.

Second, in spite of the predictions of sociologists in the mid-20th

century (and earlier) that religion would fade away in due course as the
impact of secularisation was increasingly felt all over the world, the positive
religions today show no signs of dying out. To the contrary, we have seen
'the new appearance in our time of the threat of a radical heteronomy,
embodied in the quite unexpected—say, two decades ago—growth in
the religious, social, and political power of the Religious Right'.18 In
the United States, the Religious Right may be experiencing such a boom
in numbers and influence because of the perceived immorality or even
amorality of contemporary society and culture. In other words, the rise of
the Religious Right may be a backlash to the perception that contem
porary society is unravelling through loss of family values. 'Family values' is
a disputed term, referring for some people to traditional moral rules
governing sex, drugs and alcohol, pornography, the dissemination of graphic
images of violence or gratuitous sex on television and other media, the
institution of marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman, abortion,
and the like. To other people, 'family values' refers to an oppressive,

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DAVID E. KLEMM 247

patriarchal, constricted way of life

and freedom.

The rise of the Religious Right is not restricted to evangelical

fundamentalist Christianity in the USA. It appears that all over the world
fundamentalism is resurging with attendant dangers. 'Fundamentalism' is
notoriously difficult to define, especially insofar as it can span across
different religions, take political or cultural forms, and thus unite people
of different beliefs and practices. Nonetheless, The Fundamentalism Project
just recently completed adduces a set of 'family resemblances' among
different groups. They include such traits as: (1) fundamentalists uphold
religious idealism as basis for personal and communal identity; (2) funda
mentalists understand truth to be revealed and unified; (3) fundamentalists
are intentionally scandalous and hold that outsiders cannot understand
them; (4) fundamentalists envision themselves as part of a cosmic struggle
between forces of good and forces of evil; (5) fundamentalists seize on
historical moments and reinterpret them in light of this cosmic struggle;
(6) fundamentalists demonise their opposition and are reactionary; (7)
fundamentalists are selective in what parts of their tradition and heritage
they stress; (8) they are led by males; and (9) they envy modemist cultural
hegemony and try to overturn the distribution of power.19 In addition,
fundamentalisms are based on divine revelations, and they take their
scriptural sources as absolute and inerrant, although they are often highly
selective in their readings of scripture. Armed with their revelation, they
prepare for the end of time by taking sides in the cosmic struggle, which
they view as superseding all other events.
Theological humanism needs to ask about the theological meaning
of the rise of the Religious Right in the USA and around the world.
Religious conflict and violence among true believers is all too real,
whether the self-proclaimed true believers crassly manipulate religion for
political purposes or actually think that they are following a divine will
in helping to usher in the end of the world. The key danger is
that if the resurgent Religious Right, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim,
Flindu, and so on, embraces an apocalyptic-eschatological perspective on
the world, believing that it is soon going to end, who will care about
our world?
Third, at the same time that the religious blood of fundamentalists is
boiling in opposition to modernity, many participants in more moder
ate, mainline religious communities around the world are wondering
where their religion went. Such churches, synagogues, and temples in the
so-called technologically 'advanced' countries are living up to Nietzsche's
mocking words that they will become the tombs of a deceased God.
This returns us to the question, 'why theological humanism?'

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
248 INTRODUCTION
IV. THE CHALLENGE OF THEOLOGICAL HUMANISM

The state of theology has also changed dramatically over th

the last years. Theology today seems to have divid
tendencies, which evacuate the middle ground between
to theological humanism is to offer a sane and yet comp
fit for the spiritual longing of our day. The human he
it longs for a divine not constrained by churchly autho
cultural play in postmodem discourse.
Consider first the form of churchly or confessional
theologians restrict themselves to expressing the beliefs
from their particular confessional communities. Such c
typically begins with the symbols, narratives, creeds, or d
church tradition. These starting points have the self-ev
able status of axioms, and theologians have the task of
ing these axiomatic principles to new situations of
Confessional theologians rarely, if ever, make cogniti
tested outside of the system of discourse of their
belief. They reject the idea and practice of a general th
of cultural expressions or religious forms, preferring t
inherited traditions, practices, and beliefs of their own par
On the other side, consider the secular theologies
our time, which exist in stark contrast to the confess
perhaps prosper as an escape route from them. These
autonomous interpretations of cultural processes in or
theological dimensions of meaning. Employing the
of reflection on the interconnectedness of symbolic fo
images, the secular theologies seek to disrupt or de
theological ideas or beliefs. These theologians emb
discourses, and often locate the theological in the gaps
margins of texts and other cultural processes. God
theologies as 'Wholly Other', systematically escaping t
and baffling attempts at analysis. Radical theologies me
with negative theologies and mystical invocations of the
of God.

The result of these two influential trends, and the a

ing of the middle, is the marginalisation of theology, whic
a larger intellectual context marked by widespread critique
concepts, theories, and methods of research. Almost e
is torn by debates about what constitutes knowledge an
is possible. Nearly every discipline includes promin
pose (as true statements) that truth-claims cannot be m

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DAVID E. KLEMM 249

that what passes for knowledge is re

methodology is really a disguised wil
is merely refined persuasion.
As the postmodernist agenda has pr
lost to jargon and cultural pandering
ogies flourish, perhaps as a compensat
hermeneutic of cultural questions in
Yet confessional theologians denounc
aligned with hostile, conservative fo
munity. Yet interestingly enough, it
lost its way, which was predictable
by any positive principles of theolog
itself, leaving us with nothing, and not
theologies also appear spent. They rei
to particular formulations of'faith' and
fail to address the religious dimension
culture.
It is time to reclaim a capacious a
human life before the divine. That i
culture. We propose to call the prope
humanism'. Our sincere hope is that
confidence in humanity, out of a sen
life on this planet, and out of faith i

REFERENCES

* I would like to thank William Schweiker

(New Haven, CT: Yale UP, pp. 32-9.
and Dale S. Wright for helpful com The quotation is attributed to Gerhard
Ebeling (p. 33). See also J. Grondin,
ments and suggestions in preparing this
introduction. Sources of Hermeneutics (Albany, NY: State
1 On this see E.W. Said, Humanism andUniversity of New York Press, 1995),
Democratic Criticism (New York, NY:pp. 99-110.
Columbia UP, 2004). Also see W. 4 See Grondin, Introduction to Philosophical
Schweiker, Theological Ethics and Global
Hermeneutics, p. 37.
Dynamics: In the Time of Many Worlds 5 See R.P. Scharlemann's analysis of
(Oxford: Blackwell, 2004) and T. Todorov,
Schleiermacher's systematics in The Reason
of Following: Christology and the Ecstatic I
Imperfect Garden: The Legacy of Humanism,
(Chicago, IL: Chicago UP, 1991), pp.
trans. C. Cosman (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
UP, 2002). 106-10.

2 His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Ethics for See D.E. Klemm, 'Schleiermacher on the
the New Millennium (New York, NY: Self: Immediate Self-Consciousness as Feel

Riverhead Books, 1999), p. 19. ing and as Thinking' in D.E. Klemm

See J. Grondin, Introduction to Philosophical and G. Zöller (eds), Figuring the Self: Subject,
Hermeneutics, trans. J. Weinsheimer Absolute, and Others in Classical German

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
25o INTRODUCTION
Philosophy (Albany, NY: State University
1 See Scharlemann,
of New York Press, 1997), 'Tillich and the Reli
pp. 169-91.
F. Schleiermacher, The Christian
gious Interpretation of Art' inFaith
W. Pauck and R.L.
(1821/1830), H.R. Mackintosh and Shinn (eds), The
J.S.
Thought
Stewart (eds) (Philadelphia, PA:of Paul Tillich (San
1976),
p. 12. Harper & Row, 1985), pp. 156-74, p. 165.
For an explanation, see D.E. Klemm,
'Schleiermacher's Hermeneutic: The
Sacred and the Profane' in J.F. Keuss
(ed.), The Sacred and the Profane: Contem
porary Demands on Hermeneutics (Hants,
England: Ashgate, 2003), Ch. 6, pp. 61—
76.
9 The German essay is 'Über die Idee einer
Theologie der Kultur', reprinted from
Kant Studien in Religionsphilosophie der Kultur,
zweiter entwürfe, hgs. G. Radburch and
P. Tillich (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1958), pp. 29-52. The
English translation is 'On the Idea of
a Theology of Culture' in What Is
Religion?, trans. J.L. Adams (New York:
Harper and Row, 1969), pp. 155-81. In
this essay Tillich notes that what he calls
'theology of culture' was originally named
'theological ethics'. See also the writings
in P. Tillich, Theology of Culture, R.C.
Kimball (ed.) (London/Oxford and
New York: Oxford UP, 1959).
10 See P. Tillich, 'Aspects of a Religious
Analysis of Culture' in Theology of Culture,
pp. 40-51.
11 The translation is from 'On the Idea
of a Theology of Culture' in What Is
Religion?, p. 165. The German reads: 'Der
Gehalt wird an einem Inhalt mittelst
der Form ergriffen und zum Ausdruck
gebracht.'
1 Ibid.
J.L. Adams,
#4, Francisco:
1 Scharlemann, 'Tillich and the Religious
Interpretation of Art', p. 169.
' L. Gilkey, 'The Religious Situation at
the End of the Twentieth Century' in
R.F. Bulman and F.J. Parrella (eds),
Religion in the New Millennium: Theology
in the Spirit of Paul Tillich (Mercer UP,
2001), pp. 7-18, pp. 16-17.
For an important effort, see W. Schweiker,
'Reconsidering Greed' in W. Schweiker
and C. Mathewes (eds), Having: Property
and Possession in Religious and Social Life
(Grand Rapids, MI: 2004), pp. 249-71.
See, among the many books on the
topic, D. Eck, Encountering God: A Spiritual
Journey from Bozeman to Banares, 2 edn
(Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2003); also
D. Eck, A New Religious America: How
a 'Christian Country' Has Become the
World's Most Religiously Diverse Nation
(San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco,
2003).
Gilkey, 'The Religious Situation at the
End of the Twentieth Century', p. 11.
M.E. Marty and R.S. Appleby (eds),
Fundamentalism Reconsidered, The Funda
mentalism Project, vol. 5 (Chicago, IL:
Chicago UP, 1995). I took the list of
'family resemblances' from the University
of Chicago Press synopsis of the book on
their website.

This content downloaded from 95.180.99.138 on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:24:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms