Abstract
T. R. Hatina,
New Testament Theology and Its Quest for Relevance: Ancient Texts and Modern Readers
, Bloomsbury T&T Clark: London and New York, 2013; 288 pp.: 9780567533968, £65.00/$120.00 (hbk), 9780567654717, £19.99/29.95 (pbk)
Hatina thinks that there are basically two types of approaches to the New Testament: one he calls ‘foundationlist’, which is ‘that found in or limited to the New Testament with little or no regard for later interpretations or traditions’ (p. 30); the other, which he favours, he names ‘dialectical’. This is ‘a study of that theology which is based upon or rooted in or in accordance with the New Testament’ (p. 30). It likes to pay attention to the fact that ‘attempts at unifying the New Testament into doctrinal norms are highly influenced by external factors (e.g. cultural, existential, literary, social-scientific, biological, environmental or even theological systems) that intersect and contribute to our understanding of humanity and the world. It is, so to speak, a building of a theology from the top down’ (p. 21). This does not mean that he wants to approach the Bible from a position of dogmatic theology, and indeed the list of ‘factors’ makes it seem more like a theology from ‘bottom up’. It seems that history still has a part to play, if only in putting the historical in its place. What remains is the call to courageous action. ‘For Bultmann’s generation it was the oppressive regime of the Nazis’ (p. 34). The focus is on the world of the reader. So here Bultmann is a key witness, although strangely for this Protestant’s Protestant his position is described as one ‘which is more consistent with the Catholic and Orthodox traditions’ (p. 33) The fact that Bultmann was resolutely a-political and that his philosophical system was indicted for being on the side of the oppressors is not mentioned, let alone challenged.
Hatina wants us to know that History is all about conflicting movements, and so there is no order to it. There are no fixed rules and all accounts are value-laden. Now, all language and texts are admittedly ‘oriented towards meaning’ (p. 54), yet there seems to be a preference of ‘meaning’ over meanings or rather ‘any particular meaning’. It seems to be asking a bit much to expect that one might learn something about what the New Testament means. He also seems to think that Soskice on metaphor and Derrida on meaning are saying pretty much the same thing. The ‘presupposition’ of those who believe that New Testament theology might be harmonious is, he claims, ‘the inspiration of Scripture’ (p. 59). Well, as Larkin might have said: ‘Good to get that learnt.’ He further claims: ‘The idea of a NT canon is foreign to the NT itself … no writer in the NT who posits that the 27 NT writings are to be viewed as sacred scripture’ (pp. 63–4).
In Chapter 3 we are given a potted history of Western thought. It is not especially about the Bible and very little of it is new, or well done. In Chapter 4 Hatina returns like a shark for another bite at his prey: foundationalist New Testament theologies. After cursorily reviewing the likes of Kümmel and Jeremias he concludes that there are two problems: just what is common to the New Testament and what relevance this might have for us. He deals with Cullmann and N. T. Wright in Chapter 5 as belonging to the ‘dialectical structuring’ since they have approached the text with a big picture, a grand narrative. Yet one would hardly say that they are obvious proponents of brokering a dialogue between the New Testament and the world of the reader.
Bultmann gets a reprise too. All he was lacking was a wider interest in bigger social issues and an understanding of the New Testament from the perspective of religion (p. 168). Hatina thinks we must recognize that New Testament theology is just one tradition among many, even as Christian uniqueness is an outworn myth, and that as theology it is a second order reflection upon religious faith. Religion must inform theology, and mediate between canonical texts and theology. In turn, New Testament theology can contribute to what it means to be human. Mythmaking as the New Testament did it helps give humans a sense of identity.
Those readers still patiently waiting for some content will by now be hardly surprised to learn: New Testament theology ‘is not defined by its substance, but rather by its function’ (p. 228). Unification of meaning implies control which in turn implies imperialism. E. S. Fiorenza is applauded for her unmasking of the will to power in New Testament studies, and demands a critical self-reflexivity. But does she use this discipline on herself? Does Hatina? Does he understand the risk of the tu quoque riposte, the danger that he might be the hypocrite lecteur? This is an empty book, full of sound and (polite) fury.