In the critique of Colin Gunton’s theology, much ink has been spilled on his (mis)use of the Cappadocian fathers, his (mis)understanding of Augustine and a (too) enthusiastic and misplaced embrace of social trinitarianism. Andrew Picard argues in Colin Gunton’s Trinitarian Theology of Culture: Towards a Living Sacrifice of Praise that these critiques do not do justice to Gunton’s full and mature theology. But, more importantly, in responding to the critical points just mentioned, Picard shows why Gunton is still a constructive source to engage with in theology in general, but even more so for a theology of culture in particular.
Picard does not dismiss the previous critiques outright, but he does show convincingly that much, if not all, of the critique falls into a trap of using what Picard calls a Hauptbrief-approach to Gunton’s theology. Gunton’s critics, according to Picard, have paid an undue amount of attention to Gunton’s two, admittedly most famous, titles, The Promise of Trinitarian Theology (1991) and The One, the Three, and the Many: God, Creation, and the Culture of Modernity (1993), and have correspondingly been blind to later developments in Gunton’s thinking. For example, many of Gunton’s critics make much of the idea of open transcendentals presented in The One, the Three and the Many, though this category was dropped by Gunton after that publication.
This may seem a minor point, but there is a similar trend, according to Picard, in a more significant area of Gunton’s trinitarian theology. Picard points out that what Gunton develops in the last decade of his life is a trinitarian theology of mediation. When mediation, and not analogy, becomes the central idea for Gunton, those who place Gunton firmly within social trinitarianism ‘misunderstand[] the heart and valves of Gunton’s project’ (pp. 106–07), in Picard’s estimation. This emphasis on mediation in Gunton’s trinitarian theology is correct and an important correction to charges of social trinitarianism. Also, the fact that Picard ranges over the whole of Gunton’s thinking is important and necessary as a response to many of Gunton’s previous commentators.
In light of Picard’s recurring point about the need to avoid a Hauptbrief-approach, it is odd that he spends almost one-fifth of the book in summarizing Gunton’s The One, the Three and the Many. These pages would have been better used to extend and develop Picard’s constructive contribution to a theology of culture. For it is the link from theology to culture that I wish would have been argued more convincingly in the book. With Picard, the link to culture is made through biblical exegesis of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. This exegesis strengthens Picard’s case that a theological engagement with culture should be that of a living sacrifice of praise, but it would be interesting to have Picard comment on our culture also in relation to some contemporary cultural theorists. Less focus on the content of The One, the Three and the Many might have allowed him to do that.
Picard engages in the exegesis of 1 Corinthians in order to develop the pneumatology of what Picard terms Gunton’s critical ecclesiology. In doing this, Picard makes an important and often neglected point: that the later Gunton does not make a direct analogy between ecclesiology and the being of God. Rather, the analogy is indirect so that for Gunton, as Picard correctly acknowledges, ‘God’s relation to the Church is not logical or symmetrical, but asymmetrical and personal’ (p. 216).
In a constructive and convincing way Picard shows that when Gunton’s thinking as a whole is kept in view, it is conducive to a critical engagement with culture. As such, the ‘theological’ part of Picard’s theology of culture is well supported and well argued in the book. Yet, as already mentioned, the ‘culture’ side is less well defined and developed. For example, I missed Picard providing his own definition of culture. He makes use of Gunton’s definition of culture, but he does not state if this is also his understanding, or whether he thinks that Gunton is correct in his definition. In that way the meaning of culture – a crucial part of any theology of culture – is somewhat underdetermined.
I can only hope that now that Picard has a solid foundation for the theological part of a theology of culture, he will continue to engage with questions of culture in tandem with Colin Gunton’s theology. Judging from this engaging and well researched book, that would be a very laudable project.
