Revisiting the Revisionist-Postliberal Debate on Theological Method

The longevity of the revisionist-postliberal debate suggests that the key methodological issues raised by David Tracy and George Lindbeck have not been resolved. The present study aims to further the collaborative task of renewing theological method by revisiting the revisionist-postliberal discussion of three central questions: the locus of theology, the intelligibility of Christian faith, and the justification of Christian truth claims. The study argues that although the two models do have significant differences, they actually share more methodological common ground than is usually acknowledged. For example, both models agree that Christian tradition and human experience can be theological loci, but neither is able to establish a balanced dialectic between them. Both models furthermore acknowledge the significance of the existential impact of Christian claims to truth. Their main divergence concerns the locality of theology and its critical tasks. Is theology primarily a domestic affair, within and for the Churches, or does its mission include accountability to a broader public?