Notes on <i>The Deliverance of God</i>: Part 6, The Unholy Alliance of Justification Theory and Modernity

To recap, in Part 2 of The Deliverance of God Campbell works to create some distance between readers of Paul and Justification Theory. Justification Theory has been so dominant that it's difficult to approach Paul for a fresh reading. Some of this has to do with the fact that Justification Theory has played such a large role in church history, the Protestant Reformation in particular. Thus, for many people turning one's back on Justification Theory is tantamount to turning one's back on the Reformation. This raises the stakes considerably. So in my last post I reviewed how Campbell attempts to show that both Calvin and Luther leave us with a mixed legacy when it comes to Justification Theory. No doubt they both strongly endorsed the key tenets of the theory. However, as discussed in my last post, Calvin and Luther also articulated theological positions that significantly undermine the theological and exegetical integrity of Justification Theory. In short, in reevaluating and potentially jettisoning Justification Theory we are not turning our backs on the Reformation. We are, rather, simply working to reconcile the contradictions the Reformation passed onto us.

Having discussed the church-historical issues that complicate the debates surrounding Justification Theory, Campbell goes on to consider the way Justification Theory has also been propped up by aspects of modernity. This part of The Deliverance of God was very interesting to me.

Campbell's argument is that Justification Theory is hard to dislodge because it is, in many different ways, a product of modernity. That is, Justification Theory embodies the values and ideas of modernity. This close alliance with modernity makes Justification Theory "feel right" to us given our modern sensibilities. This is deeply problematic because it makes it difficult for modern readers of Paul to criticize Justification Theory. Because if we criticize the theory we end up challenging some of the deepest values and prejudices of the modern spirit. To challenge Justification Theory, then, is to challenge the modern worldview. As with the Reformation, this raises the stakes considerably.

Let me briefly summarize the way Campbell describes the unholy alliance between Justification Theory and modernity. Specifically, we'll discuss the way Justification Theory shares modern notions of selfhood, epistemology, politics and economics.

Modern Notions of Selfhood and Epistemology
In the very first post of this series I reviewed some of the basic features of Justification Theory. Specifically, we described the introverted and epistemological nature of the journey of faith. This inward turn to find certainty should be familiar to many. It is, at root, the same path René Descartes took when he turned inward with his method of methodological doubt. You'll recall, if you forgot your Philosophy 101 class, that Descartes famously decided to deny the truth of all things--doubt it all!--to start from the ground up from first principles. This drove Descartes inward and as he contemplated this own mind he stumbled upon his first incontrovertible and undeniable truth: Cogito ergo sum ("I think, therefore I am").

Without going too much into detail, there is a general consensus that many of the problematic features within modernity started with Descartes' turn inward. Some of these problems have to do with modern notions of the self, the severe introversion of the modern psyche, what Charles Taylor has called the punctual or buffered self. This notion of the introverted and isolated self sits behind the modern fetishization of The Individual and cult of self (e.g., self-improvement).

Descartes inward turn also began some problematic trends in epistemology. For our purposes we only need to note how Descartes arrived at truth by turning inward.

Justification Theory sits very comfortably with these modern notions. Justification Theory supports the modern view of the autonomous ego. The journey to faith is undertaken by individuals. Further, it is undertaken by individuals turning inward. Faith, like Descartes cogito ergo sum, is an epistemological truth discovered in the privacy of your own heart.

Modern Politics
One of the most interesting parts of The Deliverance of God is when Campbell shows the close connections between Justification Theory and the foundational ideas behind the establishment of the modern liberal democracy. A great deal of the credit for laying the philosophical foundation for liberalism was John Locke, whose ideas fueled both the American and French Revolutions. Interestingly, as Campbell shows, Justification Theory is deeply Lockean in both form and function.

The basic form of Locke's vision of government is that of free individuals who are able to enter into agreements and contracts with other free individuals. Further, these free individuals may choose to form a government to assist in the management of the larger social contract. Importantly, the legitimacy of the government is given by the general consent of the people. Working behind all this is the notion of certain natural or God-given "rights."

According to Campbell, Justification Theory fits this political vision "like a glove." Mainly because Justification Theory is focused on individuals entering into a new contractual relationship with God. And, similar to the way the people give their consent to the government, God's rule over the believer is, essentially, one of consent/agreement, what we call "faith." In all of this, the actions of the believer (the consenting individual at the core of liberal democracies) are the focus. In this, Justification Theory is anthropocentric (human-centered) rather than Christocentric (Christ-centered).

Further, in liberal democracies, where faith is a matter of "belief," faith becomes privatized and separated from political realities. Faith, in liberal democracies, has no political implications at all. Faith is just your religious preference. Religion is a private thing you do between you and God. Keep it out of the public sphere.

Scandalously, Justification Theory, due to it's inward, individualized and epistemological nature, goes right along with this separation of faith from politics. This is deeply problematic because Justification Theory is promoting the modern view of faith--individual and private--that is one of the biggest problems in Christianity today, the notion that faith is a private transaction between you and God that has nothing to do with issues such as justice, peace or environmental stewardship.

Economics
The final way Justification Theory supports modernity is in how it embraces the centrality of the marketplace. It is difficult to separate capitalism from liberal democracy. The two go hand in hand. Consequently, the values of the marketplace have seeped into just about every facet of modern living and identity. Somewhat shockingly, by making marketplace exchange the mechanism of salvation (i.e., Jesus pays for sin), Justification Theory has made the modern market the foundation of the salvation event.

To conclude, the reason Campbell finds all this problematic, and I strongly agree with him, is that Justification Theory is crippled when it comes to critiquing the sins, errors or overindulgences of modernity. Why? Because Justification Theory, at just about every turn, supports the modern project. Justification Theory can't get ethical leverage on modernity because, well, Justification Theory is in bed with modernity. It's an unholy alliance.


Next post we move into Part 3 of the book.