Reflections on the Lindbeck, Burrell, and Hauerwas Dialog

Last Thursday Evening, and all-day Friday, I attended an event at Nazarene Theological Seminary in Kansas City, MO, called Is the Reformation Over?: A conversation among friends George Lindbeck, David Burrell, and Stanley Hauerwas. The event's format began with introductions and setting the stage for the conversation on Thursday evening. Friday Morning and early Friday afternoon featured one-on-one interviews with the three guests. (The plan was for Mnsgr. Lorenzo Albacete to conduct the interviews, but he became ill, and NTS professor Dr. John Wright took on this role.) Each interview lasted 75 minutes. Mid-afternoon, a panel discussion followed by about one hour of questions and answers.

The three interviews centered on biographical issues that influenced these scholars' work. All three men had taught or attended Yale. Burrell and Hauerwas had taught at Notre Dame. Lindbeck (Lutheran) and Burrell (Catholic) had circumstances that tied them directly to the events of Vatican II.

The overall conclusion I took away from these men is that they believe the Reformation is not yet over, but there are major changes at work in the worldwide Church. All spoke to one degree or another of God's dismantling of the Church in the present age. It is as if God is breaking some things down to build something new. Lindbeck talked about the need to establish reconciliation without capitulation. Often, our wording and conceptual frameworks have driven the division as opposed to any consequential disagreement on the truth. The agreement Lutherans and Catholics have reached on the nature of communion was held up as one example.

A common theme to all these men's stories was that most of the breakthroughs they experienced did not come from official meetings and convocations. Understanding came from people developing relationships outside of formal channels, thus giving better context about each other when decision-making bodies convened. Again, the importance of understanding context was underscored as the work of theology and philosophy was done.

I took some notes at this event but will not give a blow-by-blow review. If you want specifics, you can check out this post by another attendee. I did want to highlight one subtle observation that I doubt many others were sensitive to.

When I go to events like these, I often have my ears tuned into the "of course" moments. If I were to ask if you believe there are approximately 365 days in a year, then you would respond with "of course." "Of course," moments are when you detect a core assumption at work. Based on a smattering of comments here and there, I suspect that if you were to have asked, "Has the influence of scientific rationalism and economic freedom, on the whole, been a detriment to human history?" I suspect the answer would have been, "of course."

Furthermore, it is interesting to note who must be excluded from the conversation. Burrell noted that he had known Michael Novak in the early years, but when Novak went to work for the American Enterprise Institute and wrote books like "The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism," Burrell's and Novak's friendship ended. Burrell remarked that until very recently, he hadn't spoken to Novak for thirty years and was clearly unapologetic about this division. In fact, he seemed to take it as a moral victory. So, the new post-liberal, post-conservative conversation extends only so far.

Update: I contacted the seminary, and it appears that there are some discussions about putting the dialog in book form. No plans have yet been made about distribution. Their advice was to check back at the seminary website for updates.