Craig Geevarghese-Uffman - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Uploads

Papers by Craig Geevarghese-Uffman

How the Mind of Christ is Formed in Community: The Ecclesial Ethics of Richard Hooker

How do practices contribute to the formation of the mind of Christ in community such that the com... more How do practices contribute to the formation of the mind of Christ in community such that the community truly becomes the body of Christ?” This dissertation demonstrates that Christ acts on his Church through a complex interaction of community and practices to generate the identity, diversity, and virtue of his body. This is a controversial claim because many hold that the matter of virtue rightly consists of adherence to cherished foundations like Scripture and tradition accompanied by calls to obedience. Nonetheless, this study seeks to identify resources to help the Church imagine a virtue ethics appropriate to a 21st century communion ecclesiology. It does so by reading Richard Hooker as an ecclesial ethicist. Examining Hooker’s accounts of Scripture, participation, and liturgical practices, the dissertation develops a Hookerian account that extends the ecclesial ethics of Stanley Hauerwas and Sam Wells on both ends. On the front end, it derives from first principles an account of how humans come to see themselves as part of the theodrama in which improvisation is required. On the back end, it grounds improvisation in a theory of mimetic virtue. Along the way it shows how a largely Barthian Christology coheres with a positive account of sacramental practices and that a Hauerwasian emphasis on practices is not sectarian. Hooker’s repudiation of appeals to timeless absolutes in ethical reasoning and his demonstration that the self-ordering of the Church is phronetic action means that contemporary “liberal accommodationism” and “postliberal traditionalism” can no longer coopt Hooker to justify their ideologies.

In this paper, I argue that we need to pause once again so that we may all move together. I respo... more In this paper, I argue that we need to pause once again so that we may all move together. I respond to the Task Force on Marriage but especially to criticisms offered by Bishop John Bauerschmidt, Dr. Wesley Hill, Jordan Hylden, and Zachary Guillano. I understand that the Task Force generated a report aimed at a particular audience - General Convention. I agree with these four critics, who published their essay as part of the Fully Alive Project, that we now need to do the tougher work of providing an account of a potential decision to redefine marriage that now addresses the communion of saints, to whom we are accountable, both synchronically and diachronically. The current report did not seek to do that and therefore that work is left undone.

I part with the Fully Alive Project in that I begin my musings with the starting point of the Task Force: the assumption that we are already embracing same-sex marriage. Given this fact on the ground, I begin with the premise that the task before us is to imagine a robust theology that makes our actions comprehensible to this broader audience, which also includes future generations of Episcopalians. What is it we understand ourselves to be doing, and why did we adopt a new understanding of marriage? My paper is a thought experiment: what might such a theology look like?

I depart from the Fully Alive authors in concluding that such a theology is possible. The heart of my paper sketches this, with the expectation that others may build upon my musings. My conclusion is that such a theology is possible, but we still need to flesh it out. In particular, we need to pause to give an account of how we will preserve the good we have received as we move forward with reform. In my view, we need more work in clarifying how we won't annihilate key differences that we historically have received as blessings, and how we will prevent commoditization of human sexuality. My hope is that our next step will be to pause, let everyone catch up, answer those questions, and take the next step together.

Examining Hooker’s accounts of Scripture, participation, and liturgical practices, the dissertation develops a Hookerian account that extends the ecclesial ethics of Stanley Hauerwas and Sam Wells on both ends. On the front end, it derives from first principles an account of how humans come to see themselves as part of the theodrama in which improvisation is required. On the back end, it grounds improvisation in a theory of mimetic virtue. Along the way it shows how a largely Barthian Christology coheres with a positive account of sacramental practices and that a Hauerwasian emphasis on practices is not sectarian. Hooker’s repudiation of appeals to timeless absolutes in ethical reasoning and his demonstration that the self-ordering of the Church is phronetic action means that contemporary “liberal accommodationism” and “postliberal traditionalism” can no longer coopt Hooker to justify their ideologies.

A AL LS SO O I IN N T TH HI IS S I IS SS SU UE E: : D Do ou ug gl la as s L Le eB Bl la an nc c o... more A AL LS SO O I IN N T TH HI IS S I IS SS SU UE E: : D Do ou ug gl la as s L Le eB Bl la an nc c o on n a a s si id de el li in ne ed d c ca at th he ed dr ra al l B Br ry ya an n S Sp pi in nk ks s' 's s W Wo or rs sh hi ip p M Ma al ll l J Je es ss si ie e V Va an n B Br ru un nt t' 's s s st ta ai in ne ed d--g gl la as ss s t te es st ti im mo on ni ie es s

Thesis Chapters by Craig Geevarghese-Uffman

This introduction explains the genesis of the inquiry, methodology, my stipulated historical cont... more This introduction explains the genesis of the inquiry, methodology, my stipulated historical context, and introduces nomenclature used throughout the study.

Hooker’s most significant polemical engagement focused not on matters of action - whether a woman... more Hooker’s most significant polemical engagement focused not on matters of action - whether a woman can govern a national church, for example - but on the question of how we know what we know, a question that was central to the task of creating laws for the Church of England.

The key historical move in this chapter is to notice that Hooker’s answer to that question closely matches the answers given by those whom Sam Wells and Ben Quash have classified as “ecclesial ethicists.” Insights arise when we read Hooker as a “bridge figure between universal and ecclesial ethicists,” recognizing his turn to Aristotle, his emphasis on the centrality of Jesus, and his high valuation of the tradition and practices of the Church as efforts to inoculate the Church of England against his era’s most problematic ideas. In this chapter, I read Hooker as an ecclesial ethicist in order to excavate core principles he applies in his defense of ecclesial practices. Subsequent chapters trace that defense, but this chapter provides an essential foundation.

This chapter comments briefly on Richard Hooker's rhetorical and polemical method, and then exami... more This chapter comments briefly on Richard Hooker's rhetorical and polemical method, and then examines the concepts and methods of a subset of his opponents whom I dub the Ramist realists. My claim is not that Hooker’s opponents were all Ramist realists, but that Ramist realism was a rising ideology gaining traction among opponents and colleagues alike during the 1590s. I then contrast them with Hooker by briefly commenting on his critique of their view of Scripture in general, and then by digging deeply into his critique of their ethical reasoning. Finally, I thicken the Hookerian account developed throughout the thesis by offering both philosophical and theological critiques of Ramist realism, holding it in conversation with Barth’s doctrine of election. This chapter has strong implications for contemporary biblical interpretation and Christian ethical reasoning, for Hooker's critique of Ramist methods hold provides helpful insights as we consider contemporary biblicism.

This chapter traces Hooker's doctrine of participation in Christ, digging deeply into the ecclesi... more This chapter traces Hooker's doctrine of participation in Christ, digging deeply into the ecclesiological, epistemological, and soteriological domains. The chapter considers in depth the agency of the Spirit in calling the elect into fellowship with Christ. Drawing upon the philosophical work of Wilfrid Sellars and Karl Barth's doctrine of election, I argue that the Spirit actuates a reciprocal knowing of and responsiveness to Christ mediated by a sociality, an interactivity, and a history of shared life, all of which are constituted by a restored rationality. Such fellowship, we shall see in the next chapter, provides the epistemic ground of our ethical reasoning. The key move is to notice Hooker’s two levels of description of the real presence of Christ. The first level describes the real presence in the relational terms of the covenant of grace, while the second level clarifies how Christ is truly present to us in our personal relationships with him, redirecting our reification of the real presence from physically proximate things to the hearts of believers. Reflection on these two levels of description of the real presence sets up our consideration of practices in the next chapter.

This chapter seeks to understand how the personal relationship forged by Christ through ecclesial... more This chapter seeks to understand how the personal relationship forged by Christ through ecclesial practices provides the necessary context for our justifiable trust in Christ as the supreme exemplar. I proceed in four movements. The first introduces the work of two ecclesial ethicists whose work it is the hope of this study to extend, Stanley Hauerwas and Samuel Wells. The second extends concepts introduced in chapter 4, regarding our experience of being addressed by and responding to Christ, by developing a thicker concept of the particularity of human agents in our encounter with Christ. The third movement provides an exegesis of Hooker's account of the sacraments, demonstrating how our encounter of the real presence of Christ in practices generates and sustains our personal relationships with him. The final movement synthesizes the work of Sam Wells and Linda Zagzebski to propose that the personal relationship with Christ caused by the Spirit via ecclesial practices leads ultimately to “thick concepts” that are productive of virtue. I conclude the chapter by considering how the Hookerian account answers key critics of the ecclesial ethicists. In particular, I respond to criticisms by John Webster and Christopher Insole of Stanley Hauerwas and others who emphasize the priority of practices. One fruit of this defense is an answer to charges against Hauerwas of sectarianism. A second fruit is an indication of a potential path toward wedding a largely Barthian Christology with a positive account of the sacraments and a "Barthian virtue ethics."

In this chapter, I respond to Hooker's address to the contemporary Church by performing what he b... more In this chapter, I respond to Hooker's address to the contemporary Church by performing what he bids us to do - to shift our focus from the general to the particular. Shifting to a more constructive register, this chapter reflects upon who Hooker is for the parish, for our ethical discourse, and for our hopes for a global communion.

How the Mind of Christ is Formed in Community: The Ecclesial Ethics of Richard Hooker