The scandal of constitutive Christology
Daniel, Jeffrey David
MetadataShow full item record
According to Schubert M. Ogden, the fundamental construction of an adequate Christian theology revolves around the twin criteria of appropriateness and credibility. However, Ogden’s own employment of these criteria in constructing a Christian theology of religious diversity or religious pluralism is inadequate. Through an explanation and evaluation of Ogden’s approach to doing theology, both in terms of the criteria of appropriateness and credibility and the three phases of historical, hermeneutical, and philosophical theology, and through the employment of this approach in evaluating Ogden’s own position of Pluralistic-Inclusivism in regard to constructing a Christian theology of religious pluralism, I will argue that Ogden’s position of Pluralistic-Inclusivism fails as an adequate Christian theology of religious pluralism because of its inappropriate, representative Christology. I will further argue that the inappropriateness of Ogden’s representative Christology stems for an overemphasis of the criterion of credibility in his interpretation of the formal norm of apostolic witness and from a more fundamental overemphasis of the criterion of credibility in his approach to doing theology. From there, I will argue, towards the end of outlining work that must be done in this area, that a more adequate construction of a Christian theology of religious pluralism depends, fundamentally, on a more balanced employment of the criteria of appropriateness and credibility, which will in turn result in a more appropriate, constitutive Christology.