No Serenity Now? Hunsinger on Philippians 1:2

By -
Bernardino Mei, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Thanks to the beneficence of this blog’s editor, I’m now perusing George Hunsinger’s fine commentary on the Epistle to the Phillipians, a volume in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible series. (No remuneration, monetary or otherwise, was offered in exchange for blogging about this book.) The distinguished Karl Barth scholar and Princeton Theological Seminary professor offers his text as an “exercise in ecclesial hermeneutics” (p. xvii) and, more specifically, it is also an essay in creedal hermeneutics. That is, he is attempting to honor the integrity and coherence of the scriptural canon within the heuristic framework of the ecumenical Christian symbols of faith. This book also is an homage to Hunsinger’s teachers at Yale Divinity School – Hans Frei, George Lindbeck, and Brevard Childs. Such a confessional orientation for biblical exposition remains contested -- as do all readings of scripture -- but it is salutary for an author to be up front about it.

Philippians, By George Hunsinger (Brazos, 2020).

What first grabbed my attention was Hunsinger’s commentary on the terms “grace and peace" (charis kai eirēnē) that appear in Paul’s salutation in Phil. 1:2. Hunsinger finds it theologically significant and normative that “grace” is the first term of the pair. Both terms, in his reading, pack eschatological punch. The notion of “peace” retrieved here is quite incongruous with any quietism or resignation in the face of injustice. Recall that John’s Gospel (in typically cryptic fashion) has Jesus say: “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives” (John 14:27). I wonder, what might such unworldly peace look like for us today – an era in which a billionaire can glibly drop a sound bite about “World War III,” a time when racist violence and rhetoric are on the ascent, a moment when millions of people can downplay a pathogen that has taken more than a million lives in the United States?

Following Paul’s lead, Hunsinger asserts that Gospel peace is “an apocalyptic concept,” and thus intrinsically conflictual; like grace, it manifests itself “in spite of” the sin and death that afflict the reigning world order (p. 6). “Peace with God means conflict with the world, even as peace with the world means conflict with God” (ibid.). As such peace remains “restless to the end” (p. 7).

It is a peace that opposes death and the things that make for death. It is a peace that enters into death and in the midst of death perseveres (ibid.)

In this vein, Hunsinger delivers a bit of shade toward what is, next to the Lord's Prayer, perhaps the most famous prayer in the United States.
It is a peace that has the wisdom to change what can be changed while refusing to accept the things that cannot be changed (pace Reinhold Niebuhr) (ibid.).

Hunsinger refers, of course, to Niebuhr’s “Serenity Prayer.” (Richard Wightman Fox's stunning biography of the most eminent U.S. theologian of the 20th century, to my mind, puts to rest the controversy about whether Niebuhr actually wrote it.) To be sure, this prayer may have have empowered generations of 12-steppers to come to terms with intractable addictions, but perhaps the Gospel offers a more profound way of seeing the true struggles and hope of the world than does the Seinfeldian mantra “Serenity Now!”

Hunsinger writes:
Grounded in the apocalypse of grace, peace necessarily takes its bearings from the end of all things (ibid.)
.
Elsewhere, Hunsinger has published a volume of essays on Barth titled Disruptive Grace. Now he complements this notion with an equally provocative one -- disruptive peace. This is a peace that peace lives from eruptive grace, not from works -- not even the work of passive acquiescece -- lest anyone should boast.

==================================



Subscribe to Die Evangelischen Theologen

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

So, You Want To Read Karl Barth?

By -
Image
Every now and then I am asked for advice about studying Karl Barth. So, I thought that I would share some of my standard advice here. But, before I do that, let me just say that I am by no means a Barth expert as compared to the people whose books I will mention below. I would be thrilled to find myself in their league one day, but as of yet that remains a distant dream. Still, I have been reading Barth for long enough, and under the supervision of a number of the scholars that I will mention below, that I think I can provide a decent orientation. I have never read Karl Barth before. Which of his books should I read first? Barth’s most famous work is the monumental 13-volume Church Dogmatics . Reading the CD with understanding is not an easy thing, so you definitely do NOT want to start here. Luckily, there are two smaller works by Barth that serve as helpful introductions to his work. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction - Based on the lectures that Barth delivered duri
Keep reading

So You Want to Read….Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

By -
Image
"I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven." "The exclusion of the weak and insignificant, the seemingly useless people, from everyday Christian life in community…may actually mean the exclusion of Christ; for in the poor sister or brother, Christ is knocking at the door." "Since ethical thinking in terms of realms is overcome by faith in the revelation of the ultimate reality in Jesus Christ . . . there is no real Christian existence outside the reality of the world." "People who reject their bodies reject their existence before God the Creator." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer Prelude Andreas Steinhoff [Attribution], via Wikimedia Commons I envisioned having a lot of time for blogging this summer, but that simply has not been the case - the last month has been a crazy one, to say the least. For two weeks, I was working at a theology summer camp of sorts, the Duke Youth Academy, and s
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 1, Day 5

By -
“You Wonder Where the Spirit Went”: Jenson and Barth on the Hiddenness of God By Peter Kline I am entering into a conversation that Jenson has already begun with Barth. In a constructive essay on the hiddenness of God (Jenson 2000), Jenson considers Barth’s position on the matter only to find it lacking. I want to explore why Jenson has problems with Barth on this issue, as well think critically about his constructive alternative. I will suggest that Jenson is only partly right in his diagnosis of Barth; he in fact overlooks the heart of Barth’s teaching on divine hiddenness. The reason is that he looks in the wrong place for Barth’s pneumatology. Jenson can’t find the Spirit in Barth not because the Spirit isn’t there, but because the Spirit is hidden . These considerations will open out into a comparison of Barth and Jenson on the logic of revelation. By “logic” I mean: what is discourse about God’s revealedness and hiddenness supposed to accomplish? Part I Jenson focuses his a
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 3, Day 1

By -
On the Monstrosity of Christ : Karl Barth in Conversation with Slavoj Žižek & John Milbank By Paul Dafydd Jones For a while, I hoped to frame this conversation in terms of a dramatic interchange – something along the lines of “A Slovenian philosopher, a British theologian, and a Swiss dogmatician walk into a bar…” Alongside an eye-wateringly hip assemblage of cinematic references, literary allusions, and comedic scenes – my early favorites being when Barth imagines a young adult novel, entitled Are you there God? It’s me, Žižek , and when Milbank waxes poetic about the Twilight movies – I wanted to engage some topics that would likely receive attention, were the authors to meet for drinks. Primarily, I envisioned an intense discussion of the logos asarkos and the logos ensarkos , with Milbank talking up the former category, Barth emphasizing the latter, and Žižek asking whether recent debates are but symptoms of secret puzzle, embedded in the Church Dogmatics – a puzzle that
Keep reading

Karl Barth on Hell, the Devil, Demons, and Universalism – A Florilegium

By -
Image
You know, all the most interesting topics. Although Barth often confessed that he didn’t find these questions particularly interesting. At best they might draw sideways glances, as it were, as one travels the theological road. But I found a number of places in the records of Barth’s later conversations that I thought folks might find interesting, so I’ve collected them here. And if you aren’t familiar with the term “florilegium,” here you go ! All these texts are from the first volume of Barth in Conversation , with pages numbers given in parentheses along the way. As usual, italics are in the text and bold is mine. Hell “Now we come to hell. You shouldn’t laugh! There is nothing to laugh at! What does hell mean? I think hell means to be in the place where you are once fore all damned and lost without ceasing to exist, without losing the image of God, being what you are but being damned and lost, separated from God, whose creature you are, separated also from your neighbor, from
Keep reading