Analytic Ecclesiology: The Paradox of the Unity of the Church

Devina Benlin Oswan
{"title":"Analytic Ecclesiology: The Paradox of the Unity of the Church","authors":"Devina Benlin Oswan","doi":"10.36421/veritas.v21i2.575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Analytic Ecclesiology is a new branch within the enter­prise of Analytic Theology. The “analytic” part of the name refers to the analytic method employed to explicate the core claims of Christian theology using the tools of analytic philosophy. In the case of Eccle­siology, the concept of ecclesiastical unity demands cla­rification. The question is not why or how a collection of indi­viduals is united but in what sense they are one. The Scriptural answer to the former is that Christ is the head of the Church. It is the latter that Analytic Ecclesiology is committed to answering. Joshua Cockayne’s work, which focuses on the social ontology and group agency of the Church, has shed some light on the issue. He invites philosophers and theologians in the analytic tradition to think about Ecclesiology analytically. That is my aim in this paper. I hope to expand the discussion on Analytic Ecclesiology, not by building on Cockayne’s work, but rather by taking a step back and arguing that the issue of the unity of the Church must be discussed from the perspective of identity rather than, contra Cockayne, from the perspective of group agency. To achieve this, I shall first assess Cockayne’s account and offer my criticism. Then, drawing insights from Peter Unger’s article “Problem of the Many,” I dis­cuss the paradox of the unity of the Church and conclude that relative identity theory best solves the paradox of the unity of the Church.","PeriodicalId":33647,"journal":{"name":"Veritas Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veritas Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36421/veritas.v21i2.575","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Analytic Ecclesiology is a new branch within the enter­prise of Analytic Theology. The “analytic” part of the name refers to the analytic method employed to explicate the core claims of Christian theology using the tools of analytic philosophy. In the case of Eccle­siology, the concept of ecclesiastical unity demands cla­rification. The question is not why or how a collection of indi­viduals is united but in what sense they are one. The Scriptural answer to the former is that Christ is the head of the Church. It is the latter that Analytic Ecclesiology is committed to answering. Joshua Cockayne’s work, which focuses on the social ontology and group agency of the Church, has shed some light on the issue. He invites philosophers and theologians in the analytic tradition to think about Ecclesiology analytically. That is my aim in this paper. I hope to expand the discussion on Analytic Ecclesiology, not by building on Cockayne’s work, but rather by taking a step back and arguing that the issue of the unity of the Church must be discussed from the perspective of identity rather than, contra Cockayne, from the perspective of group agency. To achieve this, I shall first assess Cockayne’s account and offer my criticism. Then, drawing insights from Peter Unger’s article “Problem of the Many,” I dis­cuss the paradox of the unity of the Church and conclude that relative identity theory best solves the paradox of the unity of the Church.
分析教会学:教会合一的悖论
分析教会学是分析神学事业中的一个新分支。名称中的“分析”部分是指使用分析哲学的工具来解释基督教神学的核心主张的分析方法。在教会生物学的情况下,教会统一的概念需要分类。问题不在于一群人为什么或如何团结起来,而是在什么意义上他们是一体的。圣经对前者的回答是,基督是教会的元首。分析教会学致力于回答的正是后者。乔舒亚·科凯恩(Joshua Cockayne)的研究重点是教会的社会本体论和群体代理,他的研究对这个问题提供了一些启示。他邀请分析传统的哲学家和神学家分析性地思考教会学。这就是我写这篇论文的目的。我希望扩大对分析教会学的讨论,不是建立在柯凯因的作品上,而是退一步,论证教会的统一问题必须从身份的角度来讨论,而不是从群体代理的角度来讨论,这与柯凯因的观点相反。要做到这一点,我将首先评估考凯恩的描述并提出我的批评。然后,从彼得·昂格尔的文章“许多人的问题”中汲取见解,我讨论了教会统一的悖论,并得出结论,相对认同理论最好地解决了教会统一的悖论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书