The Recovery of Theology as a Practical Discipline

Abstract

I THE YEAR 1977 Helmut Gollwitzer argued that the most critical agenda for contemporary theology was the recovery of a more vital relationship between theological reflection and Christian life in the world. For this to happen, he suggested, theology must come to see itself as a second-order activity whose primary task is to mediate between present and future praxis. Put in classical terms, theology must recover a sense of being a scientia practica, i.e. at core a discipline. Calls for recovering such an understanding of theology as a discipline have become increasingly common in recent years. These calls have surfaced within a variety of theological contexts but have coalesced around a largely shared set of concerns. My purpose is to survey the various stimuli pushing for a recovered theology, both to provide a better understanding of the agenda they propose and to reflect on a key problem such an agenda must face. The fact that this is a call for a recovery of theology as a discipline suggests my starting point. One of the responses to the current malaise in theological circles has been an increase of historical investigation into the changing understandings of the nature of theology, seeking to determine what has brought us to the present situation. Of particular interest have been the shifting identifications of practical theology. A brief history of this term provides a helpful context for considering the current debates.