Page History

PDF Version of this Document

I have argued, in effect, that some so-called critical theologies, or understandings of theology as "critical reflection," not only privilege the claim to truth (or credibility) made or implied by Christian witness by exempting it from critical validation, but must also do the same with the claim of some Christian witness to be authentic (or appropriate), since otherwise reflection in faith as well as on it would be empty of meaning, reflection in faith being meaningful only if it is reflection in some faith (cf., e.g., Doing Theology Today: 75 f.). But how convincing is this argument?

...