Christoph Schwöbel: Theology in Conversation

Speaker: Wade Bellesbach (University of St Andrews)

Recent scholarship pertaining to Martin Luther’s thought explores the relationship of music to divine action and purpose, observing music as created and irreducibly given. According to Luther’s account, music is not primarily a human work or activity. Music is fundamentally a divine gift to which humans respond. This paper will place such scholarship in conversation with Christoph Schwöbel’s recent work on music and theology. Schwöbel’s work has examined how music finds its place in a generous account of divine address. Music’s ontological status is derived from its createdness and potential according to God’s communicative address. This paper will therefore consider Schwöbel’s work as an account of Luther’s theology of music, an account that not only explores music as human response to created gift but also one which considers music’s eschatological promise and identity.

Speaker: C.M. Howell (University of St Andrews)

Christoph Schwöbel’s most recent comments on music are presented in critical conversation with the field of theology and the arts. At the center of these comments is a concern for maintaining a proper distinction between God as the creator of all that is and the creative capacity of human beings—a distinction most lucidly revealed in God’s gracious act of saving a sinful creation.  Through such a soteriology, Schwöbel argues that music is inherently dialectical, expressed through such tensions as order/freedom and the striving/promise of aesthetic perfection. Music is thereby understood both as an exemplary mode of participation in God’s grace as well as fundamentally misdirected in its attempts to invoke imitations of such grace. Stated succinctly, music is both an act of creation and destruction. This paper develops Schwöbel’s critique by articulating its underlying theo-logic, with the aim of continuing this conversation with theology and the arts.

Speaker: Mark P. Hertenstein (University of St Andrews)

While Christoph Schwöbel does not expound a theology of tradition, his comments on tradition, conversations with the theological past, and writings on God and the Church introduce ideas relevant to the doctrine of tradition. The paper will think with Schwöbel’s work to show how his ideas can contribute to the theology of tradition in contemporary discussions. First, this paper will outline the nature of God as conversation and his initiating of conversation with his creatures by his Word. Second, the response of the Church in its faith and interpretation is the creaturely response to God’s Word; tradition is its historical reality. Third, because of God’s action and the Church’s nature, tradition is a living response (not merely past) to God with past, present, and future senses, sustained by and oriented toward the God who is conversation. The paper will conclude by noting some practical consequences of this reconceiving of tradition.

Speaker: Risto Saarinen (University of Helsinki)

In its Curitiba Assembly of 1990, the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) defined itself as ‘A Communion of Churches’ with altar and pulpit fellowship. The territorial traditions of Lutheranism differ from one another considerably. To cope with this new self-understanding, the LWF appointed a global group of theologians who discussed Lutheran ecclesiology from 1994 to 1996. This group produced a common statement and an extensive background documentation in English and German (The Church as Communion, LWF 1996). The speaker worked with Christoph Schwöbel in this group and participated with him in the drafting of the common statement. Schwöbel wanted to keep the LWF statement compatible with the European Leuenberg (later CPCE) statement ‘The Church of Jesus Christ’ (1995). The paper describes our collaboration and also its later continuation in the editorial board of Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie.

Speaker: Julia Meister (University of Heidelberg)

Christoph Schwöbel’s dialogues with the tradition are constructive dialogues: they aim at recovering categories from tradition that serve as heuristic and critical tools to approach contemporary ethical and theological discourses. One example are the affections of the heart, a category Schwöbel develops in dialogue with the theologies of Martin Luther and Augustine. The affections of the heart reflect upon the basic relational structure of human beings thus making it possible to analyse human behaviour within a framework of relationality. As all human action and communication is understood to be informed by desires the category of ultimate trust becomes highly relevant. This paper takes up this key insight of Christoph Schwöbel and illustrates its relevance for contemporary debates about emotionally charged conflicts in the public sphere. Taking into account the affective underlying structure of these conflicts, it is realised that the formation of desires needs to be addressed as a public task.

Speaker: Abraham Wu (University of Cambridge)

Although interreligious dialogue has become mainstream in the academic study of religion, contemporary disagreements regarding diversity and difference in our ‘post-truth’ world suggest that tolerance needs continued exploration. As Christoph Schwöbel argued, tolerance is ‘a spiritual discipline that arises from engaging with the roots of one’s religious tradition’. Therefore, for Schwöbel, to work towards friendship ‘with the religions’ is to simultaneously engage religion ‘from the inside’. Following Schwöbel, I will explore the aesthetic, ethical, and theological dimensions of attention—another ‘spiritual discipline’—in various religious traditions, literature, and its reception by writers such as Simone Weil and Iris Murdoch. In doing so, we discover how attention might serve as a framework for postures and practices that foster tolerance and friendship amid religious differences through the purging of ‘fantasy’. Moreover, I will show how attention may critically enrich tolerance as a virtue, safeguarding it from mere compromise, political correctness, or indifference.

Speaker: Rahel Pereira (University of Heidelberg)

This paper is based on two central insights of Christoph Schwöbel: First, the importance of dialogue across religious and denominational boundaries. Second, that worship is the communicative heart of the church. The text takes up these two insights, brings them together and develops them with regard to Lutheran-Pentecostal dialogue.  It seems that Lutherans and Pentecostals experience the same God in very different ways. The reflection on worship service, however, can be a starting point to initiate mutual understanding. From a Lutheran perspective, the paper will consult selected liturgical acts of the Pentecostal Altar Call—such as repentance—which embody reconciliation. In analysing the conversation taking place between the community and God through these acts, certain implied communication rules can be identified. The insights gained enrich our comprehension of theological patterns of reconciliation. Hence, the paper aims to build bridges between two Christian traditions while indicating central reference points for reciprocal learning.

Speaker: Lea Schlenker (University of Tübingen)

Since the Reformation, hymns have played a central role in Christian Lutheran worship and theology. Hymns are sung to praise and address God, being rooted in and yet transcending the specific contexts of everyday life. As Christoph Schwöbel (‘Mutual Resonances’, 2020) pointed out, music is inherently communicative, at the threshold between inner and outer, individual and social life, expressive and impressive at the same time. By singing a hymn, a believer locates herself in the corresponding religious tradition. At the same time, she actualises this piece of tradition by applying it to her specific context. In religiously pluralistic contexts, hymns can be a helpful source for (Lutheran and other) Christians engaging in interreligious dialogue, because they contribute to interpreting lived experience in the light of religious traditions and in relation to God, as this paper argues. Further, the paper reflects on the communicative structures of hymns and applies them to interreligious dialogue.

Speaker: Dirk-Martin Grube (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

I wish to pursue Christoph Schwöbel’s theology of religions further, in particular his criticism (of Hick’s kind) of pluralism and of the equation ‘less religion = more tolerance’. Schwöbel’s emphasis that we need to take a religious inside perspective rather than one beyond all religious traditions if we wish to engage in a meaningful interreligious dialogue is developed further. Drawing on an earlier conversation with Schwöbel, I argue that we need to abandon the logical principle of bivalence if we wish to engage meaningfully in this dialogue. This suggestion serves as a springboard for developing the idea of a ’humble exclusivism’: I propose that exclusivism is the natural position if we take Schwöbel’s vantage point seriously. Following Paul Tillich, I suggest that this exclusivism has to be of a humble kind rather than a triumphalistic one.

Speaker: Tomos Roberts-Young (University of St Andrews)

Placing Christoph Schwöbel within a single tradition is a seemingly insurmountable task. Nevertheless, and perhaps surprisingly given his strong association with RIST, we must acknowledge the decisive influence of the broader German theological liberal tradition on his work. To demonstrate this, I will assess Schwöbel’s work on inter-religious dialogue alongside those of Friedrich Schleiermacher. Both Schwöbel and Schleiermacher understood the importance of conversations surrounding inter-religious dialogue. Indeed, such was the boldness of their claims that both believed that there is no space within Christian theology to deny the presence of God in the religions of the others and the believers of other faiths. However, and herein lies Schwöbel’s indebtedness to German theological liberalism, concurrent with this seemingly pluralistic claim, neither thinkers shy away from confessing the insurpassibility of Christ as the fullness of God’s revelation. It is ultimately this claim that leads both to say: God is Love.

Speaker: Katrin König (University of Heidelberg)

How to unfold the Christian understanding of revelation in conversation within a pluralistic society? In the paper I wish to reflect on Christoph Schwöbel’s Lutheran understanding of revelation in conversation with Jean-Luc Marion’s phenomenological approach to revelation. With regard to ‘The Concept of Revelation in Christianity’ (2020) from Schwöbel and Givenness and Revelation (2016) from Marion I wish to outline main resonances between both approaches. In particular, I will reflect on Schwöbel’s theological arguments for the communicative, relational character of revelation and Marion’s phenomenological re-appropriation of revelation. Furthermore, I wish to compare Schwöbel’s Lutheran interpretation of the constitutive role of God’s communicative self-revelation in Christ for the constitution of faith and Marion’s phenomenological analysis of Christ self-giving as visible icon of the invisible. Finally, I will discuss the impact of Schwöbel’s conversational understanding of revelation for doing theology in conversation with philosophy and religions.

Speaker: Julius Trugenberger (University of Cologne)

In my paper I will discuss Christoph Schwöbel’s contribution to Protestant Theology of Culture. Since his inaugural lecture ‘Glaube und Kultur’ in Kiel in 1993 this field of research has been very important to him. Schwöbel’s writings enrich the debate, which today seems to be dominated by liberal Protestants (Gräb, Lauster, Moxter, and others).  I will first give an overview of Schwöbel’s approach, tracing his thoughts to their biographical, theological and historical context. I will pay particular attention to Schwöbel’s interpretation of Paul Tillich’s Theology of Culture. While contemporary liberal theology tends to overemphasize Tillich’s relevance, Schwöbel provides a more nuanced view of his strengths and weaknesses and underlines the issues on which he differs with Tillich.  Finally, I will ask whether in today’s world which is characterized by profound cultural changes (digitalization, singularization, rapid loss of ecclesial influence etc.), Schwöbel’s assumptions need to be revised or not.

Speaker: Benjamin Keogh (University of St Andrews)

Schwöbel’s articulation of the Triune God as conversation imagines an overflowing of the conversation that God is to a conversation between God and creation that establishes and defines Christian faith, resulting in conversation about (and with) God that characterises Christian theology. Here the church as creatura verbi divini becomes the site of God’s ongoing conversation, while the Christian’s claim to divinely instituted faith requires accepting the similar claims of others, thereby expanding the understanding of true religions to those that point beyond themselves to the source of human flourishing. This paper aims to probe the tension between Schwöbel’s conception of the church as creature of the word and his expanded scope for true religion grounded in God’s conversation through the lens of Mormonism where the rejection of creeds and confessions (resulting in doctrinal and theological indeterminateness) combined with an absolute commitment to God’s ongoing conversation provides an ideal testing ground. 

Speaker: David Stuart (University of St Andrews)

A remarkable element of Christoph Schwöbel’s theology is how it originates in and is developed through conversation. This essay explores the theological foundations of his approach and the potential fruitfulness of such theological practice. It is suggested that Schwöbel’s later claim that the nature of the trinity is defined as ‘conversation’ is not a divergent turn in his theology but a natural consequence of his consistent, Lutheran emphasis on God’s self-revelation. Reflection on the immanent and economic trinity is explained as Schwöbel’s foundation for essentialising conversation with God and others. Sayyid Qutb’s fundamentalist theology is then conversed with due to representing not only a different theological foundation but also an oppositional approach. Reflection on this artificially constructed conversation demonstrates the dynamism of Schwöbel’s theological method, whilst resisting syncretism, relativism and absolutism. Because it emerges from and returns to conversation, Schwöbel’s theology is justified as enabling fruitful engagement with radical difference.

Speaker: Cameron Crickenberger (University of St Andrews)

In one of his last essays, Professor Schwöbel responded to the ubiquity of kenoticism in modern theology by returning once more to his enduring theme of God as an eternal conversation of love. The final example of modern kenoticism that Schwöbel offers is Hans Urs von Balthasar’s use of the concept of an inner-trinitarian kenosis, which he sees as a final development of kenoticism’s trajectory through the 17^th–20^th centuries. In response, Schwöbel develops his own reading of both Aquinas and Luther into a theory of divine economic self-communication as pleromatic self-giving rather than kenotic self-emptying. In contrast, this paper argues that the way in which von Balthasar integrates the Thomasian emphasis of the God’s plenitude and the concept of kenotic self-giving within his trinitarian concept of love provides a way for the metaphysical frameworks behind ‘plenitude’ and ‘kenosis’ to be integrated rather than set in opposition. 

Speaker: Christian Kalmbach (University of St Andrews)

Among Christoph’s Schwöbel’s wide-ranging body of work, the poetry of John Donne is perhaps one of the more surprising, and certainly one of the lesser-known, interests. What could a German Lutheran admire in the work of a 17th-century English metaphysical poet? By engaging two of Christoph’s engagements with Donne’s Devotions upon Emergent Occasions, this paper examines the nature of and reasons for Schwöbel’s interest in Donne. In Donne’s spiritual exploration of his illness, Schwöbel found a relational, dynamic, and conversational portrayal of human being in relation to God which resonates strongly with the central concerns of Schwöbel’s own theology. Moving beyond the identification of similarities the paper concludes by reflecting on the significance of Schwöbel’s conversation with Donne for the interpretation of Schwöbel’s theological project. In particular, it is suggested that Donne’s ‘radical theology of metaphor’ may illuminate the nature and function of the central thesis of Schwöbel’s mature theology: the metaphorical claim that ‘God is conversation’.

Speaker: Patrick Cody Brown (University of St Andrews)

In a 1995 article, Schwöbel traces the absolutizing of freedom in modernity. His account parallels Skinner’s history of the development of the concept of freedom. After Schwöbel shows how freedom comes to entail ‘self-constitution’, he outlines a correspondence between certain divine attributes (aseity, omniscience, omnipotence) and the characteristics necessary for a human being to possess autonomous freedom. He argues that absolutized freedom emerges from the ‘dislocation’ of humans in relation to God, others, and the world. Elsewhere, Schwöbel suggests that theological anthropology cannot be synthesized with non-theological anthropologies but can be brought into dialogue with them. This paper brings Schwöbel into conversation with contemporary analysis of the ‘problem’ of freedom from the social sciences, particularly Krause’s critique of freedom grounded in sovereign individual agency and Sunstein’s critique of the sufficiency of self-determination to define freedom. It analyzes the mutual resonances between these accounts while also clarifying the contribution of Schwöbel’s distinctly theological account.

Speaker: Junghyung Kim (Yonsei University, Seoul)

In this paper I explore Christoph Schwöbel’s distinctive contributions to the current dialogue between religion and science in the following three perspectives: (1) insistence on the need of a more explicitly Trinitarian doctrine of creation in dialogue with sciences which is expected to correct widespread one-sided approaches, (2) adherence to the continuing significance of having philosophy as theology’s dialogue partner along with natural sciences, and (3) emphasis on the ethics of creation in the face of ecological crisis. After critical as well as appreciative analyses of each of Schwöbel’s contributions to the religion-science dialogue, I will make a few suggestions for an extended application of his ideas to the emerging issues that recent technological innovations are raising to the doctrine of creation.