Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, by Wolfhart Pannenberg (Eerdmans, 640 pp.; $49, hardcover). Reviewed by Donald G. Bloesch, emeritus professor of theology, University of Dubuque Theological Seminary. His book Jesus Christ: Savior and Lord (InterVarsity) is the fourth volume in a projected seven-volume systematic theology.
In this third volume of his much-acclaimed Systematic Theology, Wolfhart Pannenberg gives an in-depth treatment of the doctrines of the church, the sacraments, and the kingdom of God. He presents a high view of the church, regarding it as the locus of the Holy Spirit’s action in relating those who believe to Jesus Christ, but he is adamant that the church not be confounded with the kingdom of God. The church is an anticipation and sign of the perfect fellowship of love that belongs to the eschatological consummation. The church does not build the kingdom, nor does the church control the salvific action of the Spirit in the preaching of the Word and the celebration of the sacraments. In a Barthian manner, Pannenberg steadfastly holds that God alone builds his kingdom, but the church can witness to this fact. He is deeply critical of liberation theology for calling Christians to bring in the kingdom through revolutionary political action.
The catholic side of Pannenberg’s thought is particularly prominent in his discussion of the sacraments. He vigorously defends baptismal regeneration and the real presence of Christ in Communion. “In baptism there takes place our regeneration by the Holy Spirit.” He also contends in a way that will invite criticism from evangelicals that, without baptism, faith in the gospel “is not yet saving faith in the full sense.” At the same time, he is convinced that baptism without faith cannot effect salvation and that personal confession belongs to the act of baptism. He is also insistent that conversion to Christ is a prerequisite for sharing in the Lord’s Supper.
Throughout this work Pannenberg engages in dialogue with Roman Catholicism and tries to build bridges wherever he can. He acknowledges that the doctrine of justification as enunciated in the Council of Trent, where justification becomes a lifelong process of inward purification, is in basic conflict with the Reformation discovery of justification as the gratuitous act by which God grants us remission of sins. Yet he commends Trent for associating justification with baptism, since baptism effects our entry into the mystical body of Christ. He is willing to make a place for apostolic succession and papal leadership among Christians. He entertains the possibility that the Petrine office of the bishop of Rome could become “a visible sign of the unity of the whole church to the degree that by theological reinterpretation and practical restructuring the office is subordinated to the primacy of the gospel.”
In the area of eschatology, he sees no guarantee of an ultimate universal reconciliation, though he is firm in his hope of a cosmic renewal of the world that will include the vast mass of humanity. He allows for the threat of eternal damnation and hell and even makes a place for purgatory, though not as an intermediate state for departed souls whose fate is partly in the hands of the church. He strives to hold together an open future in which real decisions can be made and confidence in the God who moves and guides history toward its final destination. He rejects the millennial idea of a special lordship of Christ in salvation history that will be superseded by the lordship of the Father.
Pannenberg is critical of the idea prevalent in Catholic mysticism that Christian love primarily concerns our relationship to God and only secondarily our relationship to our neighbor insofar as that person reflects God’s love. Agape love means that God loves us for our own sakes and we love our neighbors for their own sakes. Yet Pannenberg wishes also to allow a positive role for eros love, maintaining that such love can lead to the worship of the Creator. There is no antithesis between eros and agape, for we can assume that Christian love is present in many forms of eros.
One can discern a rationalizing thrust in Pannenberg, though at the same time a respect for mystery and transcendence. He is critical of those who describe faith as the sacrifice of the intellect since real faith is based on knowledge of the gospel and assent to the fact of the resurrection. Faith involves both belief and trust (fiducia), but the essence of faith is the latter. Pannenberg’s conversation partners in this book from the side of philosophy are Hegel and Kant. There is scant mention of Pascal and Kierkegaard, who are decidedly more reserved concerning the role of philosophy in theology.
Pannenberg can be appreciated for seeking to maintain the biblical and historical moorings of the faith. He is committed to the faith affirmations of the Reformation, yet he is ready to subject these affirmations to the higher criterion of Holy Scripture. He is remarkably open to the wisdom of the Catholic church through the ages but makes clear that his loyalty is to the church of the Reformation so long as that church remains open to reform in the light of Scripture. He sees the church as a creation of the Spirit as well as of the Word, claiming that an emphasis on the Word alone can lead to “a theocracy of proclamation.” He rightly stands against current theological eudemonism in his contention that faith frees us from a striving for our own happiness.
Some evangelicals, including this author, will raise the question whether Pannenberg’s theology could lead to a new sacramentalism and ritualism that would subordinate the Word to the sacraments. Is the spiritual reality present in the sign, as he maintains, or does not the transcendent reality break into the sign and the sacramental celebration from the beyond? Does the sacrament effect what it signifies, or does not the Spirit of God reach out to us through the sacramental sign?
Pannenberg can say that in baptism and the Lord’s Supper the sign is not distinct from what it signifies, but this is to bind the freedom of God to the rites of the church in a way that compromises the biblical doctrine of divine sovereignty. It also denies the infinite qualitative difference between the divine and the creaturely.
Such questions need to be pursued in depth, and Pannenberg’s work clearly merits that level of engagement. Its publication in English translation is particularly timely, given the ecumenical dialogue that is now going on in evangelical circles as well as in the mainline churches.
