Durham University

Summative Essay Paper

Participation and Mediation: A Practical Theology for the Liquid Church

by Pete Ward

THEO42530 - Practical Theology: Engagement and Evaluation

BY
Filip De Cavel (DThM, Durham)

Durham, UNITED KINGDOM

13 December 2013

INTRODUCTION

Although Pete Wards Participation and Mediation reads like a whos who of
systematic and practical theology, missiology, and cultural studies, Ward writes a a theologian
in his own right offering a blend of theological and cultural voices to support his own project:
How can practical theology in dialogue with systematic theology offer a methodological
model to the church that is missionaly interacting with the flow of theology in popular
culture?1
Besides the likes of other notable theologians like Jrgen Moltmann and Miroslav
Volf, to name a few, Ward writes original and knowledgable for the PostEvangelical/Reformed christian, be he an Anglican who favours Fresh Expressions, or the
charismatic experimenting with alternative worship.
Ward is not particular known for a formal connection to the Emerging Church
Movement (ECM), Fresh Expressions or similar movements, but neither are Moltmann, et al.2
Still all of them, and many more, have influenced the ECMs theology and its sibling
expressions as they developed during the last decade. Wards readers, at the time of writing
PaM, might have expected an easy and welcomed stroll in the park - Ward, being a youthworker and having the classifier Liquid in his book title surely must have set some on the
wrong path.

Pete Ward, Participation and Mediation: A Practical Theology for the Liquid Church,
(London: SCM, 2008), p. 191. (Hereafter PaM).
2

Dave Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical, Rev. North American edn (Grand Rapids, MI: EmergentYS
Books, 2003), p. 18. Dave Tomlinson is a noteworthy and a similar kind of writer and, in fact, in many ways a
predecessor of Ward. Highlighting problems with British Evangelicalism, The Post-Evangelical, originally
published in 1994 was again printed separately for a North-American audience nearly ten years later, at the peak
of the Emerging Church hype. See also Brian Stanley, The Global Diffusion of Evangelicalism: The
Age of Billy Graham and John Stott, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2013), p. 244.

But, according to Robert Doornenbal, Ward offers an academic and thoroughly

theological, account of the more revisionist streams of the Emerging Church.3 Revisionists
minister as postmoderns. Working from a more postmodern constructivist paradigm, these
revisionists stress a strongly experiential, socially activist, inclusive, pluralist, pilgrims-onthe-way, this-world affirming community, an approach contrary to the Relevants who
minister to postmoderns and the Reconstructionists who minister with postmoderns.4
Boundaries between these streams are ambiguous since these labels themselves are
fluid and one needs to be careful as not to equate the label with a person or sub-stream of
either these approaches within the ECM. Still, there is general agreement that the revisionists
are considered the more progressive stream on this spectrum.
At this point it seems inappropriate to categorise PaM as revisionist in nature but in
the concluding chapter Ward challenges, through the example of Taiz, the assumption that
theological capital is only generated within congregational setting. Taiz, Ward asserts, is a
Liquid Church as it mediates the life of God beyond the walls and indeed the social relations
of the congregation.5 From an Anglican, Evangelical or Reformed point of view, this
assertion provokes the conventional ecclesiology of these Protestant traditions and its mission
in a globalised word, warranting therefore a tentative progressive label.

Robert Doornenbal, Crossroads: An Exploration of the Emerging-missional Conversation with a

Special Focus on missional Leadership and Its Challenges for Theological Education (published doctoral
thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2012), p. 51.
4

John Bolt, An Emerging Critique of the Postmodern, Evangelical Church: A Review Essay, Calvin
Theological Journal, 41, no. 2 (2006), pp. 205-21 (p. 218).
5

Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 187.

A LIQUID CHURCH

It is fair to point out that before PaM there was an earlier attempt by Ward to explore
the themes he presents in PaM. In The Liquid Church Ward stresses the need for the
churches, wether successful or not in terms of growth, to think about the way they make faith
relevant for those outside the church.6 In essence The Liquid Church is a missiological call
for the church to be of relevancy to the wider and global community, a call that has been
reinforced and fully theologically explored in PaM.
It is this writers conviction that Wards PaM is precisely that: A plea for a culturesensitive church in a time where traditional and emerging churches need to find and use
conceptual tools to answer this challenge for contextualisation without loosing their orthodox,
historical, doctrinal or institutional identity.7 Although less visible in PaM, Ward is cautious
not to over-contextualise. Ward, asserts in an earlier reflection on the Eucharist that

[t]he Christian gospel must be expressed within culture otherwise it doesnt come alive. At
the same time, the reality of God and the gospel of Jesus Christ are always transcendent
[italics mine] of any cultural expression of the faith, however powerful or relevant or inspired
that expression may appear to be.8

So the gist of Wards PaM centres around two questions that flow out of this plea for a
culture-sensitive church: Firstly, what is the nature of theology that (in)forms the church

Pete Ward, Liquid Church, (Carlisle, Cumbria Peabody, Mass.: Paternoster Press, 2002). See also
Henk de Roest, De Marge als Vindplaats van Creativiteit: Emerging Churches, Fresh Expressions, in Als
een Kerk Opnieuw Begint, Handboek voor Missionaire Gemeenschapsvorming by Gerrit
Noort, Stefan Paas, Henk de Roest and Sake Stoppels (Zoetemeer: Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2008), 312-25
(pp. 312-20). de Roest emphasizes Wards influence as the ECM adopts the idea that an ongoing conversation
should result in a church that truly - in christological fashion - communicates Christ to the world.
7
8

Ward, The Liquid Church, p. 4.

Pete Ward, Essentially Strange: Communion and Culture, in Mass Culture: Eucharist and
Mission in a Post-Modern World, ed. by Pete Ward., (Oxford: Bible Reading Fellowship, 1999), pp. 14-35
(p. 33).

and, secondly, what is the shape of the practical theology that offers the tools for the fluid or
liquid church?
Against this particular context wherein PaM was written I will offer reflection on
three areas covered in this book: (1) A short summary of PaM based on what I understand to
be the pivotal chapter of the book, chapter 7, Communion and Mediation, (2) a
reflection on the originality of the way Ward addresses Communion as the main emphasis
on dealing with the nature of theology in light of the shape of theology and (3) offering
constructive reflection by way of exploring recent contributions from the field of systematic
and practical theology in particular those contributions dealing with the methodological
questions surrounding the implementation of a practical theology in relation to Wards use of
Social Trinitarianism?9
As for the practical and methodological contribution, I will interact with Helen
Cameron.10 As for the systematic theological part of PaM, there will be interaction with the
work of Jens Zimmermann.11
The Communion (Eucharist) will be the common point of reference in all of these
interaction between aforementioned authors.

To distinguish between practical theology and the other often systematic theology used in PaM, I
will refer to the latter as formal theology in light of Camerons four theological voices.
10

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice: Theological Action Research and
Practical Theology (London: SCM Press, 2010).
11

Jens Zimmermann, Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An Incarnational-Trinitarian

Theory of Interpretation, (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2004). As to a more recent work of
similar nature as Wards, Tony Joness The Church is Flat will, from a practical theological point of view,
add supplemental support to Wards approach via the theology of Moltmann and his relational ecclesiology.
Tony Jones, The Church Is Flat: The Relational Ecclesiology of the Emerging Church
Movement, (Minneapolis, MN: The JoPa Group, 2011), Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 1, Location 158.
Interestingly enough, Jones uses Osmer to reflect upon the data gathered in his study of the ECM. See also
Richard Robert Osmer, Practical Theology: An Introduction, (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans
Pub. Co., 2008).

COMMUNION AND MEDIATION

In exploring the way Ward addresses the nature of formal theology and the shape of
practical theology, the vantage point will be that of Wards seventh chapter on the Eucharist or
Communion. This might seem out of place but there are at least two good reasons for this
approach.
Firstly, in a seemingly chiastic fashion, Ward centres the two themes of nature and
shape of theology around the Eucharist (Communion). The Eucharist becomes the pivotal
expression whereby the relationship between theology and culture becomes operative.12
Up until now, previous chapters were heavy on framing a systematic theology and
cultural theory, informing the reader of the Trinitarian patterning in participation that could be
of evaluative nature for the church. The consequent chapters move toward reflections on how
particular cultural and ecclesiological examples from the wider (christian) pop culture serve
as case studys, exploring artefacts (things) as the WWJD-bracelets and liturgical
expressions like the Protestant but also ecumenical community of Taiz.
Secondly, chapter seven is a chapter where Ward shines in originality: Except the odd
exemption, there are no references to world class theorists, theologians or missiologists.13 This
chapter is the culmination of two strain of thoughts being explored by Ward: At the one hand,
there is the study of both (1) participation i.e. the relational understanding of the Trinity as
being in communion, extends itself to the life of the Christian community and (2) mediation
i.e. which animates the theological.
On the other hand there is the active participation of the Christian community
performing through and via the liturgical (con)texts resulting in production, representation
and consummation.

12
13

Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 121.

Pete Ward, Essentially Strange, in Mass Culture: Eucharist and Mission in a Post-Modern
World, ed. by Pete Ward, p. 33.

In short, in chapter seven, Ward highlights the presupposed connection between the
nature of theology with the shape of practical theology, the interaction between the
participation/mediation and the production/representation/consummation. It is Wards opinion
that the Eucharist offers an embodied performance where doctrine and experience, historical
tradition and the present context transcend the dualistic approaches he warns about in the first
chapter: Culture becomes truly a mediating partner between modern dualistic approaches of
practice and theory, social science and doctrine, and [d]isembodied theology is being
replaced by concern to locate the doctrinal in the practices.14
It is worthwhile noting the similarities but also the evolution Ward made between his
earlier reflection on communion in Mass Culture and this chapter. In Mass Culture Ward
is adamant about the needed connection between the missional church and culture, a
connection that is resourced by communion.15
By reflecting on the history of youth culture since the seventies up until the eighties,
Ward enters the discussion on how a the practice and the theology of the communion can
mutually enrich each other so that a move towards the non-believer and the popular culture in
which he moves, becomes a reality.16 In particular Ward analyses the way Christian youth, and
the way they move between different cultural scenes, whereby [t]he problem is the extent to
which they are able to transport their faith, which is very much alive in the Christian cultural
scene, with them as they journey.17 This problem seems to originate in the overcontextualisation of faith that now needs to be complemented by decontextualization as it is
presented in the bread and the wine of communion.18
14

Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 47.

15

Pete Ward, Essentially Strange, in Mass Culture: Eucharist and Mission in a Post-Modern
World, ed. by Pete Ward, p. 15, 35.
16

Ibid., p. 24.

17

Ibid., p. 33.

18

Ibid., p. 34.

As we skip forward nearly ten years, we notice a clear evolution. Communion as a

decontextualizational instrument for a missional youth-work and church made way for a less
instrumental approach. Wards recent chapter on communion becomes a full fletched
reflection on the nature and practice of communion as the central act of worship through
which the text is (re-)enacted. Interestingly enough, Ward warns the reader not so much
against over-contextualisation as he did in Mass Culture but, rather, emphasises that
readers should not interpret him as if he over-contextualizes the Eucharist, reducing theology
vis--vis culture.19
Where before, Wards call for the missiological nature of the bread and the wine,
stressed the central narrative of the Christian faith in the transcendent nature of God and the
overarching story that shapes us as believers, he offers now an interpretative framework of a
performative and hermeneutical nature: The doctrinal and the historical moves and changes
along with and in relation to culture, shaping the communal and individual identity.
Ward is not blind to the interdisciplinary approach needed to evaluate the Eucharist.
He realises that the production of the liturgical performance asks for a consideration of
sociological data | the use of more social-scientific methods of enquiry.20 The reason for this
data is, according to Ward, to have a clear view of how the performance of the Eucharist
explores the way doctrine is performed and mediated by performance; it does not entail the
reduction of the theological to the cultural.
Although Ward commits himself to a method of reflexivity, and introduces a plethora
of names to illustrate the significance of cultural studies, it is hard to pin point his
appropriation.21 This is critique been vented by others:

19

Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 123.

20

Ibid., p. 125.

21

Ibid., p. 123.

10

While Ward (unfortunately) never directly addresses the issues of interdisciplinary (how to
relate distinct fields with distinct epistemological perspectives) chapter seven moves in this
direction. Using the Eucharist as a framework the author explores the place of participation
and mediation in this practice, showing the reader the fertile ground for cultural and
theological discourse.22

It becomes clear that hermeneutical questions of appropriating the idea of participation

and mediation are of fundamental importance when searching for that particular connection
between the nature and shape of theology. Andrew Kingsey, on a similar note, expresses his
concern on Wards take on the relationship between theological disciplines and social
theories. Kingsey warns of [t]he use of cultural analysis to understand everything from the
Christian youth industry to the Eucharist [...] | [...] there is concern that the social sciences
have eclipsed theology again.23 Referring to a formal theologian, Kingsey suggests
Bonhoeffer as a welcomed example of integrating the sociology with theology. According to
Bonhoeffer, and this brings us back to the Pete Ward of Mass Culture, the Eucharist shapes
us to see the world in different ways. It resists simple cultural analysis, and it is more than
simply a text produced and circulated in the manner of the song Shine, Jesus, Shine.24
Concluding this first part of the paper, reflecting on the overall project of
interconnectedness of the nature and shape of theology, we can safely state that for Ward
Communion is more then a just study case of how the nature of theology and the shape of it
are mutual interdependent; Communion is also resourceful for the church as it embodies a
way of seeing and a way of integrating the life of the divine mystery into the church.

22

Andrew Root, review of Participation and Mediation: A Practical Theology for the Liquid
Church, by Pete Ward, International Journal of Practical Theology, Vol. 15, no. 1 (2011), pp. 137-139.
(p. 114).
23

Andrew D. Kingsey, review of Participation and Mediation: A Practical Theology for the
Liquid Church, by Pete Ward, Religion & Theology, Vol. 17, no. 1 (2010), pp. 55-59. (p. 58).
24

Ibid.

11

At this point it is appropriate to introduce Helen Camerons Theology in Four

Voices and expand even more on the connection between the nature and the shape of
theology and how this integration can be explored more fully.

INTRODUCING HELEN CAMERON

In her Epiphanic Sacramentality Helen Cameron situates the commitment
needed between practical theology and other disciplinary approaches, a commitment which is
often underestimated:

What is, perhaps, less common is an appreciation of how the holding together of descriptive
accounts of church practice with more traditional theological sources can both disclose
something about the nature of the lived reality, and contribute to theological learning and
pedagogy.25

Commitment to interdisciplinary approaches characterises practical theologies. It is

my contention that Camerons interdisciplinary methodology offers an appropriate frame to
handle complex questions where theoretical discours, traditional theological sources,
ecclesiological traditions and descriptive accounts of church practices meet.
This rich tapestry of voices is reflected in the proposed methodology of Cameron.26
The methodology of Cameron and the team of ARCS (Action Research Church and Society)
provide a method called Theological Action Research (TAR), a method typified by five

25

Clare Watkins and Helen Cameron, Epiphanic Sacramentality: An Example of Practical Ecclesiology
Revisioning Theological Understanding in Explorations in Ecclesiology and Ethnography, ed. by
Christian Batalden Scharen (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2012), pp. 71-89 (p. 71).
26

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice: Theological Action Research and
Practical Theology, (London: SCM Press, 2010). Here one can find a full account of the methodology of
Theological Action Research (TAR), in particular chapter 4.

12

characteristics. One of the characteristics in particular is of interest i.e. Theology in Four

Voices.27

THEOLOGY IN FOUR VOICES

Before I explain the reason why Camerons methodology is a constructive suggestion
to test Wards own methodology, let us briefly look into these four voices.
What is this Theology in Four Voices? (1) Espoused Theology: What we say we
believe / what motivates our intention-driven practice; (2) Operant Theology: What the
practices themselves actually disclose as our lived out theology; (3) Normative Theology: The
theology of our tradition / church - e.g. scripture, doctrine; (4) Formal Theology: The
theology of the professional theologian.
What is of particular interest is how these voices interact and inform each other with a
special focus on the tension between what people think they should do (Espoused), what they
do (Operant), what they ought to do (Normative) and how professional theologians can enter
this convergence from their point of view (Formal).
Several reasons induce a closer look at how Camerons methodology could be
beneficial to Wards project.
Firstly, they share the same desire to offer an integral approach to theology; instead of
separating out of theologies, they emphasise a methodology as a heuristic device for
exploring what we believe is the to-be-hoped-for full picture of theology [...].28 To be fair,
Wards methodology is less constrained and more open-ended as to its direct appropriation.
Wards method is foremost one of reflexivity. His kind of reflection is based on the cultural
studies way of seeing, enriched by a broad dialogue between practical theology, missiology,

27

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice, Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 4, Location

940-64.
28

Clare Watkins and Helen Cameron, Epiphanic Sacramentality, p. 74.

13

(e.g. inculturation, contextualization, translation, and indigenization). There is also a

strong ecclesiological aspect to which I return later (i.e. the perichoretic understanding of the
Trinity). Lastly, throughout this conversation theres the realisation that knowledge is situated
and therefore timely.

Secondly, both methodologies presume a data-driven approach.29 Again, Ward

acknowledges the need for data-gathering and analysis but leaves out references to particular
studies to reflect upon, notwithstanding the anecdotal references to the performance of the
Communion. Cameron offers in that sense a welcomed case-study of how such a data-driven
approach helps the conversation between the four theological voices. The question in
Camerons example might, however, be too specific: What is the centrality of the Eucharistic
celebration in the life of the diocese, and the creation of pastoral areas to restructure parish
life to enable them and the diocese to be more mission focused?30
This question or rather, study case, highlights the similarities in scope (Communion,
Church and Mission) as in output and result. Wards anecdotal example is insightful as it
shows how the intentional (Espoused) meaning of Communion is being obscured by the
performance (Operant) of the ritual i.e. people miss the rich significance of the priests
movements as there eyes are usually closed.31 In a same manner, Cameron acknowledges the
discrepancies between the operant-espoused and the formal-normative; by way of this
interpretative device, one can discloses where communication and connection have failed in
some way.

29

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice, Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 4, Location
1628-58. Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 125. Production, however might also involve a
consideration of sociological data.
30

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice, Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 4, Location

31

Ward, Participation and Mediation, p. 132.

1995.

14

But not so much the examples contributes to our evaluation of Wards approach as
does Camerons own evaluation of the use of the Theology in Four Voices. Especially as she
concludes and concur with Ward that practice indeed does have a transformative impact
on academic (Formal) theology. Cameron asserts that the formal and even normative
voices (or at least, the interpretation of them) is quite properly to be formed by the voices
that arise from faith practice as a complex locus for theological understanding.32

Thirdly, Camerons methodology leaves room for an open invitation of Ward to be

introduced to the table as a formal theologian. Aside from the aforementioned hiatus of a case
study accompanied by the sociological data and its analysis of it in a multidisciplinary
context, the strengths of Wards project is that he offers a clear theological trajectory and
project to approach the Eucharist from a practical theological point of view. The perichoretic
understanding of the Trinity could be considered to be a clear formal-theological addition to
the conversation of how practical theology is more then a deliverer of experiential knowledge.
Ward is not the only one to emphasis this kind of understanding. A typical trait, Doornenbal
describes, of similar theologians who informed the ECM was the explicit

attempt to connect the horizontal understanding of the church as a community of

believers not only to the work of God (the church as constituted by the Spirit) but also
to the person or, rather, persons of God. More specifically, their descriptions of the
church, in terms of relationships and community, with fluid structures, are connected
to a perichoretic understanding of the Trinity.33

32

Helen Cameron, Talking About God in Practice, Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 4, Location

2418.
33

Doornenbal, Crossroads, p. 51. Cf. also Tony Jones who states that [m]any congregations in the
emerging church movement are instinctively using the very relational ecclesiology that Moltmann proposes.
Jones, The Church is Flat, 150. J. Edward Clevinger, The Implications of the Trinitarian Perichoresis for a
Missional Ecclesiology: Lesslie Newbigins Call for Renewing the Churchs Missional Vocation in a Postmodern
World, (MA thesis, Emmanuel School of Religion, 2003), 57.

15

Since one of the aims of this review is one of appropriation it would serve us well to
chose an approach that focusses on the enabling of the practitioner, the practical theologian or
those who feel the tension between the espoused and the operant theology the most. We
believe that this approach draws practice into a dynamic set of other theologies, which are
often more recognised as such.
As to our second question i.e. how does Wards original approach on dealing with the
nature of theology in light of the shape of theology addresses the performance of the
Communion, I propose a further exploration of the interdependency between the nature and
the shape of theology and how both can become transformed by this interaction. Camerons
methodology welcomes a fruitful interaction in which Wards contribution could be explored
through a more thorough research-oriented approach, providing the necessary data to explore
this particular transformational relationship between the nature and the shape of theology.

The last and third part of this paper will be an attempt to sketch the contours of a
conversation based on Camerons methodology, inviting Ward to the table as a the Formal
theological voice, not the only one though, but interacting with particular data offered by
Tony Joness The Church is Flat: The Relational Ecclesiology of the Emerging
Church Movement and with a reflection on Jens Zimmermanns appropriation of John
Zizioulass in relation to Wards focus on the Trinity in relation to the churchs dealings with
contemporary culture.34

FAITH SEEKING UNDERSTANDING SEEKING FAITH

Since this paper is foremost a reflection on the appropriation of Wards practical
theology, the focus on the Trinitarian expos of PaMs chapter five which is in essence of a
34

See also Jens Zimmermann, Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An IncarnationalTrinitarian Theory of Interpretation, (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2004).

16

hermeneutical nature might be underexposed. But some remarks might be in order. In this
particular chapter, Wards sows the seed that will come to full growth in his chapter on
Communion as he asserts that a participation in the Eucharist is a participation in the life of
God. Ward arrives at this understanding through Zizioulass emphasis on the relationship of
the Trinitarian ontological Being and how that reflects in the church.
Wards appropriation of Zizioulas results in how Zimmermann summarises this:
[I]nstead ontology itself is declared to be relational.35 Focusing on this Trinitarian
ontology, Zimmermann borrows also from Zizioulas and other Eastern Orthodox theological
developments and recognises the importance of the Trinitarian conception of the human
subject for the recovery of theological hermeneutics. This recovery is initiated by a relational
ontology at the heart of reality. Miroslav Volf elaborates more extensively on this recovery.
Volf in commentating on Zizioulas, explains that:

to mean that God at first (in the ontological sense) is the one God, and only then exists
as three persons, then the ontological principle of the deity is lodged at the level of
substance, and one still remains entangled in monistic ontology. The trinitarian
identification of hypostasis and person effected by the Cappadocians breaks through this
ontology. This identification asserts that God's being coincides with God's personhood. 36

According to Volf it is only in this way, the non-monistic way, that God the Father
constitutes his own existence in the free personal activity of the divine life. The construction
then of the subject is based upon the notion of perichoresis (participation), which refers to the
reciprocal interiority of the trinitarian persons. Volf explains that in every divine person as a

35
36

Ibid., p. 281.

Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity, Sacra Doctrina
(Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), p. 76.

17

subject, the other persons also indwell; all mutually permeate one another, though in so doing
they do not cease to be distinct persons.37
As with Zimmermann, Ward could have helped the reader by elaborating more on the
concept of perichoresis and its dynamic that characterises the divine Triune God especially
since the reinstatement of a Trinitarian ontology is much more depending on the concrete and
historical situated Incarnation, a notion that is absent in Wards approach.
For one, in addressing Heideggers concept of being, Zimmermann does borrow from
Zizioulas concept albeit without mentioning the importance of perichoretic thinking: The
essential thing about a person lies precisely in his being a revelation of truth, not as
substance or nature but as a mode of existence.
Mentioning Mirsoflav Volf, Ward could have elaborated more on the concept of
perichoresis as a way to neutralise the tension between a self that is neither individualistic nor
monistically constructed: This reciprocal interiority of the divine persons determines the
character of their unity. The notion of perichoresis offers the possibility of overcoming the
alternatives unio personae unitas substantias.38 It seems then that Zimmermann clearly
being informed by Volfs work is making a case for a Trinitarian relationality whilst at the
same time warns for the speculative nature of it.
We observe in Zimmermann a helpful reluctance to engage fully with a Trinitarian
ontology apart from its Incarnational interpretation. So why bother, as Ward did, with
Trinitarian ontology at all?
To answer this question we may turn to Paul Collins The Trinity: a Guide for the
Perplexed were Zimmermann is being supported by an equally helpful warning. Collins
seems to appreciate Zimmermans strand of critique and means of rehabilitating a

37

Ibid., p. 209.

38

Ibid, p. 211

18

hermeneutic of relationality.39 Collins explains that a hermeneutic of relationality is

not the same as an ontology of relationality. The former is of an interpretative nature, the
latter of a speculative nature. Although both can leave room for mutual integration,
Zimmermann seems to avoid what Collins calls, the methodological interplay between
human experience and divine revelation.40 It is an unexpressed commitment to an apophatic
approach in the construction of the doctrine of the Trinity.41 In that sense, Ward is on the
same par with Zimmermann.
Still, for Zimmermann, the Trinitarian conception of the human subject is to important
for the recovery of theological hermeneutics. It is because of the Trinity that their could be an
Incarnation and it is after the Incarnation we can state with Zimmermann that [h]ere the
unknown and unseen has indeed become concrete history-the ethical call has become flesh.42
Collins seems to express his agreement with Zimmermann in a more positive manner.
It would be possible to argue, following the analysis of Sarah Coakley, that the hermeneutic
leads to an ontology of relationality.43 It seems that Zimmermann is inversely more
apologetically of returning back to an ontology of relationality.
So, apart from Zizioulass influence, Zimmermann works back from the Incarnation to
the Trinity with the help of an appeal to Bonhoeffers conceptuality of personhood, as
understood in relation to the Incarnation and the Cross.44 As a result we must be Trinitarian
and at the same time, rather than the Incarnation being a sidestep of the Trinity, the Trinity is
interpreted by the Incarnation.
Furthermore, revisiting the use of perichoresis and the focus on relationality by Ward,
Kevin Vanhoozer offers an interesting warning. Vanhoozer spends some time arguing more
39

Paul M. Collins, The Trinity: A Guide for the Perplexed, Guides for the Perplexed (New York:
Continuum, 2008), p. 36.
40
Ibid., p. 30.
41
Ibid., p. 5.
42
Zimmermann, Recovering Theological Hermeneutics, p. 305.
43
Collins, The Trinity, p. 37.
44
Ibid., p. 36.

19

solidly against perichoresis as a projection or why the turn to relationality may not be
Trinitarian.45 Vanhoozer has a point when he warns against a use of a Trinitarian relationality
(perichoresis) as the model of human social life.46 The question can be asked if Gods being
as communion has become to much of an all-inclusive onto-theological idea, as well as the
template for conceiving the sociality of human being.47
If Ward wants to offer a robust relational ecclesiology based on a Trinitarian
understanding of how God mediates with the world, we do well to insert Zimmermanns and
Vanhoozers reluctancy to by-pass either the Incarnation (Zimmermann) or speculativeness of
the hermeneutical presupposition that the Trinitarian relationality (perichoresis) as the model
of human social life (Vanhoozer)?

CONCLUSION
There is much to be commended in Wards converging of themes like Communion,
culture and practical theology. Against the background of the ECM and sibling movements,
Ward opens up new avenues for research into the transformative nature of theology in light of
its embodiment within a church that is fully aware of its situatedness in time and location.
The accompanied relational ecclesiology and social Trinitarianism helps Ward not to
over-contextualise. However, because of its speculative nature and detached from the
Incarnational element, the theology infusing Wards PaM could be victim to a pitfall: An

45

Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and

Authorship, Cambridge Studies in Christian Doctrine (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 157.
Vanhoozer cites Alister McGraths warning of the danger of Trinitarian inflation. It is simply too easy to reason
that humanity has some quality x because God, as Trinity, is x and humanity is created in the image of God
(Alister E. McGrath, The Doctrine of the Trinity: An Evangelical Reflection, in Timothy George [ed.], God
the Holy Trinity: Reflections on Christian Faith and Practice (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2006), pp.
17-35).
46
Vanhoozer, Remythologizing Theology, p. 157.
47
Ibid.

20

anthropological navet; Is Ward aware of a possible projection or why the turn to relationality
may not be Trinitarian at all.48

48

Again I refer to Tony Joness The Church is Flat for an in-depth study of similar navit looking and
Moltmann and the human fallibility when developing his relational ecclesiology.

21

Bibliography
Articles

Books
Ward, Pete, Participation and Mediation: A Practical Theology for the Liquid
Church (London: SCM, 2008)
Zimmermann, Jens, Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An IncarnationalTrinitarian Theory of Interpretation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic,
2004)
Chapters of Books

Sources Consulted
Zimmermann, Jens, Incarnational Humanism: A Philosophy of Culture for the
Church in the World, Strategic Initiatives in Evangelical Theology
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2012)
Thesis
De Cavel, Filip, A Calibration of Worldview- talk: A Critical Evaluation of James K. A.
Smiths use of Social Imaginary as a Critique of Rationalistic Worldviews (MA.
thesis, Evangelische Theologische Faculteit, 2012)