Lincoln Harvey (ed.), The Theology of Colin Gunton (T & T Clark, 2010), 217pp (with thanks to T & T Clark for review copy)
This book has been a long time coming. It is now 7 years since Colin Gunton died and there has still been very little engagement specifically with his work, although see the recent monograph from David Hohne. Gunton has tended to be criticised for his criticism of Augustine and along with John Zizioulas his use of the Cappdocians. This edited collection of new essays therefore is very welcome, because Gunton was a brilliant theological mind, who was beginning to offer one of the most interesting British systematic theologies for a long time. Sadly we only have an unpublished draft of a first volume.
Many of the essays track the way Gunton's theology developed. Robert Jenson examines Gunton's major theological decisions, John Webster studies Gunton's use of Barth, Stephen Holmes looks at the doctrine of the trinity, John Colwell, the doctrine of the church and final essay by Christoph Schwobel provides us with the shape of Gunton's theological thought. Other essays pick up the content of particular doctrines: Alan Spence on christology, Paul Cumin on the doctrine of God, Paraskeve Tibbs on anthropology, Justyn Terry on atonement and Terry Wright on providence. Lincoln Harvey's contribution explores Gunton's theological method and Brad Green engages with Gunton's interpretation of modernity. Harvey has gathered together an excellent line-up of theological voices, some already established and some just starting out; some who were Gunton's colleagues, some who were his students and some who found him as a dialogue partner in their postgraduate studies.
The tone is generally positive towards Gunton's theology. Webster is the most critical, but not overwhelmingly so. Webster still acknowledges the huge contribution Gunton made to British systematic theology. At a number of points in the book, Gunton is described as rescuing Christian theology when many thought it redundant. (Gunton's loss has left a huge whole that has not been filled by any theologian working in an English university. This is not to say English theology is not interesting and constuctive, but that Gunton and co. at King's and Webster - then of Oxford now of Aberdeen - were doing systematic Christian doctrine in a way that is no longer happening). Steve Holmes, a student and later colleague of Gunton, demonstrates in his essay that he is moving away from Gunton's theology as he seeks to develop his own contribution - he is much less critical of Augustine - while being grateful to Gunton for providing an example of how theology should be done. In Paul Cumin and Lincoln Harvey, two of the final students who begun their PhDs with Gunton, he is still seen as the theologian of choice and in a book that seeks to be an examination of Gunton's theological thought, it is helpful to see how Gunton's project can be continued (pace Bernhard Nausnera's recent SJT article). Jenson provides a response to those that critique Gunton's criticism of Augustine ('Did Gunton overdo it? Probably ... But was Gunton just wrong? I think not ...'), which I think has merit (although we wait to see Lewis Ayres forthcoming Augustine and the Trinity).
I hope this book marks the beginning of further engagements with Gunton. He remains one, if not the, British theological (and nonconformist) voice of the last century. This book certainly shows why Gunton's theology matters, as he tried to show why the doctrine of the Trinity mattered. I hope T & T Clark will publish a paperback version as sadly the cost of a hardback will prohibit many from purchasing a copy. A final word from Webster on Gunton:
Systematic theology owes Gunton an immense debt. He gave intellectual and rhetorical weight to the task of Christian theology in Britain at a time when the majority believed it to be redundant. He was animated by the momentous ideas of Christian dogmatics; though sometimes in his writings they were clumsily or hurriedly expressed, he loved to let them loose and watch what happened. He edified students and colleagues in the academy and the church by restless intellectual energy, by cheerful partisanship, by his catholic range of interests, above all, by his conviction that the gospel is a grand matter for the mind (p.29).
Comments