Waiting for Gospel, by Douglas John Hall

Chapter 9 – Beyond Good and Evil

1.  Hall introduces us to renowned atheist Friedrich Nietzsche, whose infamous writing serves as a powerful backdrop against the mystery of good and evil.  Hall’s thesis here is quite “anti-Nietzschean,” which he presents in three parts: 

First, “Over against the contemporary drift towards ethical relativism, good and evil are permanently legitimate distinctions, the steady contemplation of which is necessary to the survival of civilization.”

Where is this ethical relativism most prevalent today?  (Let’s look far and wide as we address this question.)  Why does our survival depend on the steady contemplation of good and evil?  Why does Nietzsche’s “value-prioritizing” fail to deliver any kind of moral stability?

2.  Second, “Contrary to every type of moral absolutism, good and evil are inextricably interwoven in the fabric of our actual living.”  Hall expounds: “For serious Christians, moralistic solutions to profound ethical questions are especially frustrating because (usually in the name of true-believing Christianity!) they promulgate simplistic moral teachings that misrepresent and distort the more penetrating moral insights of biblical faith.”

Hall urges us to distinguish biblical faith from the dangerous biblicism of old morality.  Biblical faith understands that…“our lives in the actual living of them are inevitable strange admixtures of good and evil.” 

Hall asks, “Can anyone be called good, really?”  And I ask, “If not…why?”  (Paul and Jesus have great answers for this!)

3.  Third, “Human authenticity depends upon a grace that is indeed…beyond good and evil.”  Citing his much-earlier reading of a poem by John Greenleaf Whittier, Hall concludes, “In the last analysis, it is not ours to untangle the mysterious intermingling of good and evil that constitutes a life; that the authenticity for which we long and toward which our goodness is indeed a striving, can be realized by us only as a gift – only as a grace that is indeed…beyond good and evil.”

And finally, this gem by Hall:  “What divine grace offers…is a new freedom: the freedom to end preoccupation with one’s own moral condition; the freedom to become ultimately concerned, rather, with the good of the other.”

What role does God’s grace play in your understanding of and coping with good and evil?  Consider sharing a real-life experience of this freedom…moving from self-concern to other-concern, with the help of God.

Waiting for Gospel, by Douglas John Hall

Chapter 8 – What Are People For?

1. In Hall’s introduction to this chapter, he states, “There is probably no more immediately important theological and ethical task for Christians today than that of developing a worldly theology of human stewardship.”  He follows this up with a protracted example of Montreal’s irritating non-responses to global warming and environmental degradation. 

This is where the theology of stewardship comes in.  “What is the chief end of man?”  He responds alternatively, “The chief end of the human being is to be God’s faithful steward in a profoundly threatened creation.” 

What are the practical implications of this statement for us as individuals, as congregations, and as a nation?

2.  Hall goes on to reframe his discussion by lifting up Wendell Berry’s book, What Are People For?  That’s it, Hall declares!  That’s our primary anthropological question for Christians today.  He notes the explosive growth of the human population, along with the destructive footprint we have left upon our planet.  “Do we have any positive purpose at all?” he asks.  Is it all doom and gloom in the end?  Many have adopted a cynical, nihilistic attitude in this regard. 

Again, Hall draws us back to the symbol of the steward.  In doing so, he juxtaposes the biblical model with the common contemporary model of steward as “manager,” which Hall labels as “theologically and apologetically stupid beyond belief.”  The human being is not equipped to be the CEO of creation!  Take a few minutes to reflect and elaborate on the national and global destructive footprint we face today. 

Why are we such poor “managers” of God’s creation?

3.  Hall states that biblical stewardship consists of two poles: accountability and responsibility.  Accountability implies limits to the human steward’s activity.  The earth is not ours to do with as we please.  This eliminates any perceived status, “as if the human were separable from or superior in relation to the other creatures; the emphasis rather is on calling – vocation.”

The steward is accountable AND responsible.  “The Hebraic-Christian tradition has a high anthropology; it expects much of the human – not only in the realm of deeds, but also in the realm of understanding.”  Hall notes that some ecologists feel that the human species is the great villain that ultimately threatens our planet’s existence.  In a dramatic example of public confrontation, Hall cites the question raised in a university gathering, “If Man is the problem, wouldn’t the world be…better off…without him?”  Hall responded, “So far as we know, homo sapiens is the only creature that indulges in valuation…”  “Are we only problematic creatures?  Or do we, could we, make a difference – not only for our own species, but for all?”

What do you think?

4.  In conclusion, Hall says, “I think that Christians must indeed be and become, in this skeptical and often despairing world, the defenders of humanity.”  “We must also be prepared to stand up for the capacity of human beings qua human beings to understand, to care and to try to effect change.”  This is our collective responsibility…one that “belongs to our Protestant heritage…to remind our fellow humans that we are accountable to Another.” 

We are capable, Hall says, of an astonishing kind of responsibility…including thought, understanding, articulation, and acting.  Such stewardship, as keepers of God’s garden, “is not an idle or merely idealistic vocation; it is a real possibility.”

Where can you imagine and envision such possibilities?  What is our role in addressing such change?

Waiting for Gospel, by Ddouglas John Hall

Chapter 7 – The Identity & Meaning of the Self

1.  This essay is built upon Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s short poem, “Who Am I?”  As Hall notes, it considers three possible responses to the question it raises.  The first response is “Other-Determined Selfhood.”  Dependence on this response “leads to the dark side,” as Darth Vader would put it.  “To be dependent upon others for one’s sense of identity and purpose is surely one of the most demeaning personal forms of human oppression.”

Why is this response so prevalent today?  Where have you struggled with this response over the years? 

2.   The second response is “Self-Determined Selfhood.”  While all of us move between these first two responses, the second promotes the illusion of the “self-made man.”  Later, Hall writes, “Thus, from the third chapter of Genesis onwards, the quest for human self-sufficiency is shown to be the most pathetic of human quests: starting out to make ourselves great, we end by being smaller than ever.  Seeking, like the pair in the Garden, to be ‘like gods,’ we regularly end by being less than authentically human – and by knowing that we are…‘naked.’”  (Does it feel drafty?)

Again, why is this response so prevalent today?  Where have you struggled with this response over the years? 

3.  Our faith tradition, in an effort to hold the first two responses in check, turns to a third possibility: “Responsive Selfhood.”  Bear with me, here, as I share several choice quotes.

“Torn between the identity laid upon us by others and the self that we feel (or perhaps fear) ourselves to be, we lack both integration and direction.”  “And such a recognition ought to be regarded by us all as a matter of hope, for it affirms the importance – even the potentially redemptive significance – precisely of periods such as ours, periods of confusion and spiritual doubt.  Perhaps in these gray, twilight times real thought, as distinct from ideology and mere convention, is possible – and real faith, too, as distinct from rote religious habit and mere credulity!”

Does this ring a bell?  How so?

“The first (observation) is that this last and only satisfying response to the question of personal identity and meaning is a response…without being an answer.”  “Not an answer, then, but the presence of the Answerer: that is the response that Bonhoeffer receives, at last, to his, who am I?”  “Religion wants to have answers – preferably in very explicit, propositional form.  Faith, which is to say trust in the Eternal Other, is content to know that it is known…”

“The second observation: Because it refuses to claim finality for itself, because the Source of its confidence lies in a trust that transcends the self, faith is free to open itself to all the answers to the identity and meaning of the self that the human mind and spirit devises; it is free to discourse with reason; it is free to discourse even with doubt – perhaps even especially with doubt, including self-doubt.” 

Does this make you feel better?  How so?

“Humankind as a whole seems incapable of living with its own deepest questions, and will resolve them superficially – even knowing its answers to be superficial! – rather than living with trust in our creaturehood and in its Creator.”

“Whenever that self…finds itself once again thrust naked into the burning questions of its being, meaning, and destiny, it must again discover the only satisfying answer, the answer that is beyond all the answers: ‘Whoever I am, thou knowest, O God, I am thine.’”

Wow…that really makes me feel better!!  How about you?

Waiting for Gospel, by Douglas John Hall

Chapter 6 – The Theology of the Cross

God bless Douglas John Hall…but this had to be one of the most arduous essays he’s ever written.  It’s brilliant, of course, but entirely too lengthy, complex…and needlessly short on common vernacular.  I’m reducing this chapter to its basic points so we can attempt to digest the valuable theological nuggets buried deep within Hall’s eloquent, yet rambling, dissertation.  Uff da!

1.  Hall offers two preliminary observations.  First, Martin Luther championed the term, “theology of the cross,” and contrasted it with a “theology of glory.”  Second, Luther’s considerable thoughts and contributions are valuable, not only for their historical significant, but for their contemporary role, as well.  Hall directs his interest toward this second observation and application of Luther’s theology.  

What do you know of Martin Luther as an historical figure, and what do you see as his contributions to our present context?

2.  Hall sees the theology of the cross as having a “usable past.”  In seeking to frame the term, he notes it “refers to a spirit and method that one brings to all one’s reflections on all the various areas and facets of Christian life and faith.”  It cannot be stated concisely in a formula, but it can be recognized in various theological expressions.  

Briefly (ha!) review his “informing principles of this theology.”  How does each inform our faith?

- The first is “the compassion and solidarity of God.” 

- The second is “the cross as world commitment.” 

- The third is “honesty about experience (Christian realism)”

- The fourth is “the contextual character of this theology.”

- The fifth is “the refusal of finality.”

3.  Hall concludes with his meditation on the three Pauline virtues: faith, love, and hope…and how they effectively address the opposite of each within the theology of the cross.  

How do we, as Lutherans, embrace and promote these virtues in our context?