Does a Real Albert Nolan Need Don Cupitt? A Response to Ronald Nicolson
In this paper, in response to Nicolson’s claim that South African liberation theology is non-realist – or at least is non-realist in its language – I suggest that Albert Nolan’s important book God in South Africa is not based on such an “exotic” philosophical basis but is a reflection using the popu...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
1997
|
| In: |
Heythrop journal
Year: 1997, Volume: 38, Issue: 2, Pages: 180-190 |
| Further subjects: | B
Liberation Theology
B Realism (theology) B Nolan B Albert |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | In this paper, in response to Nicolson’s claim that South African liberation theology is non-realist – or at least is non-realist in its language – I suggest that Albert Nolan’s important book God in South Africa is not based on such an “exotic” philosophical basis but is a reflection using the populist Marxism of the anti-apartheid struggle of the 1980s. The clue here is Nolan’s use of the Colonialism of a Special Type thesis, an integral part of ANC and Communist Party discourse since the 1960s. Nolan himself has described his work as “historical materialist” in its philosophical language. Such a position seems far removed from non-realism, although they certainly sound similar in Nolan’s God-language. I then examine non-realist theologian Don Cupitt’s model of “militant religious humanism” (from his Life-Lines) and conclude that a non-realist liberation or political theology along these lines suffers too much from a sense of relativism or absurdity for it to be of use to those who use liberation theology. From this I try to suggest how a non-realist liberation theology might be developed. In the end, however, I conclude that though such a theology could be constructed, it would probably not be effective: liberation theology requires a real God who really sides with the poor. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1468-2265 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Heythrop journal
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/1468-2265.00044 |