The Problem of Objectivity in the Genesis of Buri’s Theology

Abstract

Neo-orthodoxy rested much of its claim to be a major theological movement on its decisive repudiation of nineteenth century liberalism. Although this claim appeared credible twenty years ago, it has become increasingly apparent in recent years that neo-orthodoxy was really a historically conditioned parenthesis within a line of development continuous with the nineteenth century.1 The contemporary movement of radical theology represents in this sense a return to many of the themes, if not the tenor of thought, in nineteenth century liberal theology. This is true despite the equal emphasis that must be placed on the distinctive features of any truly twentieth century theology: the tempering by the historical events of the twentieth century, the greater theological self-consciousness, the promise but also the horrors and the perils of post-war, post-industrial society. The same must be said of Buri. He has absorbed the twentieth century theological revolution as deeply as anyone, and his thought is unintelligible apart from understanding his appropriation of twentieth century philosophy and theology. But unlike many of his contemporaries, Buri has never believed that a decisive break with nine- teenth century theology is either necessary or possible. He is and always has been a basically liberal theologian. Buri has always fought for a truth, therefore, which younger or newly converted radical theologians are only just now discovering.