24
Liberation: Challenges to Modern Orthodox Theology from the Contextual Theologies1 Peter C. Bouteneff When it comes to the articulation of theology, context is at the same time an inevitability, a responsibility, and a liability. It is inevitable that every expression of theology is brought forth in a particular language, at a particular time and place. It is a responsibility in that the framing of theology must be responsive to evolving cultural, linguistic, and even socioeconomic realities: it must address its prophetic word to people where they are. But context can also be a liability when a theological expression remains bound to an ancient or otherwise distant formula without perceiving the need to “translate” it from its original setting. 2 Context can also be a liability when it overtakes theology, where theology becomes so beholden to its linguistic, cultural, and sociological setting that it loses its prophetic character altogether. Such, then, is the challenge facing anyone who dares articulate theology: to express genuine, timeless, true theology in a way that is conditioned by context, receivable within context, but not diluted by context. At different points in history, theological expression has been stamped to greater and lesser degrees by its historical setting. As an example of heightened contextual awareness, the Liberation theologies that arose out of Latin America in the 1960s engendered several movements of pastoral, theological, and ecclesiological significance. Cut to the heart by societal and ecclesiastical injustice, as well as inattention to the plight of the poor and otherwise marginalized and dehumanized of society, theological expressions arose from numerous geographical and socioeconomic settings, coming collectively to be known as “contextual theologies” owing to the primary role played by the contexts that engendered them. These began within the Roman Catholic Church and continued to find expression both there and in Protestant and independent churches. The question underlying the present essay is why the Orthodox churches, flourishing over the centuries in lands with as much poverty, oppression, and suffering as anywhere, have not produced a significant “contextual” or “liberation” theology. Here I will first introduce, especially to Orthodox audiences unfamiliar with it, the phenomenon of the modern contextual theologies, exploring their basic features and the impulses that evinced them. I will proceed to examine twentieth1 Portions of this essay were delivered at a conference at the Volos Academy for Theological Studies, June 3-6, 2010. The conference title was “Neo-patristic Synthesis or Post-patristic Theology: Can Orthodox Theology be Contextual?” 2 As an example of the latter, the Chalcedonian “in two natures” language bears the indelible stamp of a highly particularized context: classical Greek ontological terminology that had undergone various Christian adaptations over centuries. This language continues to challenge its contemporary interpreters.