Ok, now the Group Game is finished, and we know who has advanced to the Round of 16. But first, the results from the final games.
Group Photius
Final Results:
Eberhard Jüngel - Rosemary Radford Ruether 26 - 9
Joseph Ratzinger - John Hick 29 - 6
Group Standings:
Ebehard Jüngel 9 +33
Joseph Ratzinger 6 +35
----------------------------
Rosemary Radford Ruether 3 -17
John Hick 0 -37
Group Gregory
Final Results:
John Zizioulas - Gustavo Gutierrez 14 - 15
Hans Küng - Edward Schillebeeckx 18 - 10
Group Standings:
Gustavo Gutierrez 9 +7
John Zizioulas 6 +16
------------------------------
Hans Küng 3 +1
Edward Schillebeeckx 0 -24
Group Hilary
Final Results:
Robert W. Jenson - Sallie McFague 22 - 6
Hans Frei - Vladimir Lossky 14 - 12
Group Standings:
Robert W. Jenson 9 +51
Hans Frei 6 +7
--------------------------
Vladimir Lossky 3 -6
Sallie McFague 0 -48
This means that the following theologians have qualified for the Round fo 16:
Colin Gunton
Paul Tillich
Karl Rahner
Reinhold Niebuhr
Jürgen Moltmann
T.F. Torrance
Wolfhart Pannenberg
Henri de Lubac
Hans Urs von Balthasar
Yves Congar
Ebehard Jüngel
Joseph Ratzinger
Gustavo Gutierrez
John Zizioulas
Robert W. Jenson
Hans Frei
6 Germans, 4 Americans, 2 Frenchmen, 4 others. 9 protestants, 6 catholics, one orthodox. That's not so bad. However: 16 males - that's just a discrace. Let's see in 50 or 100 years time... I'm sure the feminist theology movement will be seen as one of the most important trends in theology in the 20th century.
Note: this is not a ranked list. I will give present the brackets for the end game when it begins. However, I have been very busy lately and will be so for the rest of this week (This is also the reason for the lack of "serious" posts on my part). This means the World Cup of Systematic Theologians will go on a short break now for a few days. But be sure to stay tuned for the rest of the tournament, because we have some very tough games ahead of us!
New Substack: Late Star Trek
3 weeks ago
7 comments:
I am saddened at the gender divide as well. When I think of the voices involved in my own spiritual formation it has been in the arena of theology that I have been blessed with many strong female voices: Eaton, Sölle, Radford Ruether, Fiorenza, Chittister, all leap to mind. But sadly I know this is in part because of where I chose to study. Perhaps this reveals that such important voices are still silenced or at least not given such prominence.
I'm not so sure its necessarily a matter of silencing or lack of prominence today. I can only speak of the Catholic tradition on this, however. Given the fact that the Second Vatican Council was our most significant event of the 20th Century, and it happened in the 60's, those theologians most involved in its sessions or adaptation and implementation are given pride of place within the scope of 20th century theology. And these were mostly men.
However, when I look at Catholic theology, both in the academy and in pastoral application, I see that women such as Elizabeth Johnson, Mary Catherine Hilkert, Lisa Cahill, Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza, M. Shawn Copeland, and Michelle Gonzalez are among the most prominent faces in the contemporary scene(Hilkert and Copeland both being recent presidents of the CTSA). While they may not enjoy serious consideration by the institutional Church, their impact is felt at every level of academia and the pastoral sphere.
Our contest is about 20th century theologians and, from the CAtholic viewpoint, Vatican II is central. It has to be. These aforementioned women just weren't there or heard from in the '60's, '70's and '80's when de Lubac, Balthasar, Congar, Rahner, Kung, Gutierrez, Ratzinger, et al. were furiously working directy in the conciliar atmosphere and aftermath. The loss in Catholic thought (as, it seems, in all Christian theology) is the lack of women's voices ACROSS the 20th century. But again, from a Catholic viewpoint, theology in the '90's and now in the new century has witnessed the advent and ascent of feminist perspective. So I do not see that this perspective is being silenced, it's just taken until now (after the 20th century) for it to be heard.
Again, again, I am going to take exception to that... why should a chromosomal difference matter? The matter here should be the quality of theological thinking, not sex.
Perhaps we will have a plausible female competitor the day we see one who has given us something similar to Pannenberg's Systematic Theology, or von Balthasar's Gloria, in the great orthodox (with a small "o") tradition of Christian dogmatics.
Simply, favoring one over another just because of their sex doesn't cut it (Gal 3:28). Show me the theology!
Another thing: why should you care about including feminist theologians? Does that mean that you should also care about including "male-ist" theologians, in case there is any around?
While it obviously is true that for a large part of the 20th century theology was not a field where women could work independetly (as assistant's, yes, but that's a different matter), we do decide here and now how we look back at that century. And we still choose to think that the traditional male way of doing theology is the one that counts.
Eduardo, of course cromosomes are irrelevant, it is the cultural experience of being a women that counts. It is clear from that last few decades that female theologians have a different perspective one many questions in theology, and not taking this perspecitve into account is a serious flaw in most, if not all, theology. In that sense, almost all theology is male-ish, it just is not aware of it. The male point of view is presupposed.
A good example I think is the doctrine of sin. Traditionally the worst form of sin is Pride. Now, if we look at the traditional role of women in society, pride is rarely an option. Rather women have tended to go in the opposite direction, instead of overinflateing their egos, the may reduce it into nothing. Clearly here the traditional view of sin needs modification. Male theology has failed to see this.
in addition to the lack of female's (which will surely be overcome in the 21st century) is the utter lack of African or Asian theologians. Despite the Church's rapid growth in the South, very few of theological insights (outside of the interest in liberation) of Africa or Asia have penetred Western imagination. This will certainly have to change in the next century. When will Westerners begin to listen to Africans and Asians on their own ground.
David Tracy's absence from the Round of 16 is regrettable!
Post a Comment