International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

brill.nl/ijpt

Models of Public Theology*

Eneida Jacobsen
Escola Superior de Teologia, So Leopoldo, Brazil

Abstract
In this article, diffferent models of public theology are characterized according to the
reasons given for the importance of and need for a public theology (foundational models) and the ways proposed for its realization (action models). There are three emphases of identified foundations: the first understands public theology as a task driven by
God (model of disclosure); the second anchors the need for public theology in religious
questions that afffect all of humanity (universal model); the third bases itself on the
finding of the public presence of religious discourse in contemporary society (factual
model). With regards to the prospects for action, three principal ways are identified,
which afffirm the possibility of the publicization of theology: addressing diffferent audiences, such as the academy and the church (model of the audience); articulating itself
through a style and an accessible form of argument (apologetic model); addressing
contextual challenges (contextual model).
Keywords
public theology, foundational models, action models

Introduction
In recent decades starting from the notion of a public theology, several authors
have argued in favour of the publicization of theology. This is due to Martin
Martys elaboration of the concept, first used in an article on the thought of
Reinhold Niebuhr, published in 1974. For Marty, by reflecting on the religious
behaviour of people in the light of biblical, historical and philosophical
positions, Niebuhr offfered to subsequent generations a paradigm for all public

*)Translated from Brazilian Portuguese by Thia Cooper.

Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2012

DOI: 10.1163/156973212X617154

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

theology.1 In brief, the term is adopted by other authors, among them, David
Tracy, who, in 1981 publishes The Analogical Imagination, a work that defends
the need to escape particularity through a public theology that articulates religious truth claims.2 Currently, the available bibliography on the theme of public theology is extensive and has representatives in several countries.
The diversity of theorists occupied with a public theology brings a conceptual diversity: there is no univocality in defining its purposes, its theological
foundation or the meaning of the term public theology. In 1978, Charles Strain
notes that as with all initial effforts to specify the parameters of a particular
genre, the definition of the term varies from person to person.3 Two decades
later, Max Stackhouse writes that the term public theology, of course, is in
dispute and has taken several forms.4 In 2007, Dirk Smit comes to the conclusion that there exists no single and authoritative meaning of public theology
and no single normative way of doing public theology.5 Hence, Breitenbergs
finding seems to present itself as inevitable: in short, the more I read about
public theology, the less clear I am that everyone engaged in discussion and
debate about it is talking about the same thing.6
In this article, the aim is to explore the diversity starting with the diffferent
models of public theology. It is not a question of proposing the unique and
fixed forms, but of mapping and grouping similar contributions. Such mapping
will not be able to do justice to the specificity of each authors thought, but it
has its value in providing a systematic view of the diffferent perspectives that
are presented in the name of a public theology. It aims to facilitate, in this
way, the analysis of the relevance and viability of each model in light
of new contexts, as in the case of Brazil. The impossibility of covering all

1)
Martin Marty, Reinhold Niebuhr: Public Theology and the American Experience, Journal of
Religion, 54:4 (1974), 33259.
2)
David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism (New
York: Crossroad, 1981).
3)
Charles Strain, Walter Rauschenbusch: A Resource for Public Theology, Union Seminary Quarterly Review, 34:1 (1978), 2334 at 23.
4)
Max Stackhouse, Broken Covenants: A Threat to Society?, in Gabriel Fackre, ed., Judgment
Day at the White House: A Critical Declaration Exploring Moral Issues and the Political Use and
Abuse of Religion (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) pp. 1827 at 1920.
5)
Dirk Smit, Notions of the Public and Doing Theology, International Journal of Public Theology,
1:1 (2007), 43154 at 443.
6)
E. Harold Breitenberg, To Tell The Truth: Will The Real Public Theology Please Stand Up?,
Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics, 23:2 (2003), 5596 at 56.

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

production of public theology makes this efffort consciously provisional, subject to review and even a restructuring of the proposed systematization.
The identified models of public theology can be grouped into two categories: foundational models and action models. The claim of the public character
of the gospel as a task driven by God, for example, refers to a theological basis
that does not define how theology can and must act. The concept of a background that sustains a public theology does not necessarily determine the
required practical consequences, which makes the distinction between the
two categories useful, although no model or category excludes others. As I
shall seek to show, the same author can combine diffferent perspectives of public theology.

Theoretical Foundations for a Public Theology

In the literature on public theology, one can identify three main foundational
principles: the first is theological (a model of disclosure), the second is existential-philosophical (a universal model) and the third is sociological (a factual
model). The model of disclosure is characterized by defining the public
role of theology as a task driven by God that reveals Godself to the world.
The universal model considers theology as public knowledge for answering
existential questions of any individual; thus, universal questions. The factual
model, finally, is based on the fact that faith does not need to go through
a process of publicization because it naturally behaves this way: it is a
factual finding that gives theology the need to reflect on the relation between
faith and public action.
Model of Disclosure
The ability to be disclosed is in opposition to the duty of silence and secrecy.
Public here is synonymous with clear and manifest, as opposed to things made
secret; so that what becomes public can be seen and heard by many people.
A public ceremony, for example, does not happen in secret, but can be
attended by anyone. The work of Jesus also is illustrative of this point: I have
said nothing secretly, he afffirms before the high priest (RSV, Jn 18:20). Jesus
healed, preached, taught and discussed in the open, in synagogues and in the
temple; testifying to the truth that the word of God must be proclaimed to the
people. That is why Luther, turning to Erasmusfor whom there are certain
things that even if they are true and could be known, should not be exposed to

10

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

public earsargues that the sacred Scriptures are clear and salutary, and can
and must therefore be divulged, learned and known.7
The model of disclosure is based on the public being of God, who reveals
Godself to people in diffferent ways and, so, it is incumbent on the church to
testify publically its faith.8 That very broad definition can assume diffferent
faces, as Smit demonstrates. He presents four theological emphases, which are
used to support a public theology: the first is the public nature of God (either
based on one person of the Holy Trinity, or having a Trinitarian perspective);
secondly, is the emphasis addressed to the church to testify the Gospel through
words and deeds (with prominence to the experience of baptism and the community); thirdly, is the emphasis addressed to the church to promote reconciliation, justice and peace (based on concrete situations, such as the struggle
against apartheid); the fourth emphasis is directed to the church to, despite its
flawed character, obediently testify to the goodness and mercy of God (that is,
the divine call is understood to be independent of the fallibility of the public
action of the church).9
Another perspective that also can be included in the disclosure model is
represented by Jrgen Moltmann. Moltmann calls attention to the coming
character that has to permeate a public theology. According to him, the church
is not the point of reference of public theology, but the kingdom of God: just as
an ecclesial theology, Christian theology needs to unfold in the direction of a
public theology, and, thus, participate in the suffferings, the joys, the oppressions and the liberation of the people.10 This means that theology not only
presents itself in the public realm, but also puts public things in the light of
the coming kingdom, bringing the place of a theology concerned with Christ

7)

Martinho Lutero, Da vontade cativa, in Martinho Lutero, Obras Selecionadas, vol. 4

(So Leopoldo: Sinodal; Porto Alegre: Concrdia, 1993), p. 35 [available in English as Martin
Luther, On the Bondage of the Will, in Martin Luther, Basic Theological Writings, ed. T. F. Lull
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989)].
8)
Stackhouse relates the extent of the ecclesial testimony and the divine nature as follows:
Christians believe that we humans can see the universal love of God in creation, experience it in
the sustaining grace of providence, know it in Jesus Christ and hope for its fulfillment in a coming
Kingdom where all the peoples can bring their gifts and find final healing. All who know
this God must go public and be a witness to a possibility that changes souls and civilizations
(Max Stackhouse, Reflection on How and Why we go Public, International Journal of Public
Theology, 1:1 (2007), 42130 at 426).
9)
Smit, Notions of the Public and Doing Theology, 44954.
10)
Jrgen Moltmann, A paixo de Cristo: por uma sociedade sem vtimas. Entrevista com
Jrgen Moltmann, Cadernos IHU em formao, 2:8 (2006), 7882 at 81.

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

11

to the middle of the fields of conflict in the world, and not behind the walls
of the churches.
Universal Model
Universality, understood as the possibility of reaching all human beings, is, on
the one hand, in opposition to that which is restricted and private. On the
other hand, what is restricted and individual can also oppose the notion of
contextuality, in reference to what is shared by people locally or as a group.
Thus, the model presented here can be diffferentiated into two dimensions:
universality and contextuality. The principle of universality can reject contextuality, criticizing it for its private character; while that of contextuality can
reject the universalist proposition that eschews the experience of particularity.
These perspectives come together only through the fact of being opposed to
that which is merely individual, referring to something in common, pertaining
to a collective.
As representatives of the first perspective, the contextual can refer to the
many theologies that have redeemed the experience of certain groups of society (blacks, women, indigenous peoples and so on) through the (re)construction of theology: theology no longer belongs to solitary intellectuals of faith,
but is a way toward democratization of the discourse about God.11 The model
of the contextuality of theology as public theology is further explored in the
section dedicated to the factual models.
As for the second perspective, which opposes universality and particularity,
David Tracy has been its principal representative. For Tracy, the public character of theology is anchored in the nature of religious questions that are faced
by any human being or society and to which the theologian seeks to provide
answers. The question of the meaning of existence and the possibility of a fundamental trust amid fears of life would be, according to Tracy, examples of
questions that, given their universality, require publicity. He states that All
theology is public discourse,12 because it provides answers to universal existential questions. When dealing with such questions, theology is automatically

11)

Ivone Gebara, discussing the method of an ecofeminist epistemology, observes that the religious hierarchy tends to institutionalize religious knowledge: To ask a question from experience
is to democratize the powers making them see that they exist in various ways in diffferent human
beings and groups (Ivone Gebara, Teologia ecofeminista: ensaio para repensar o conhecimento e a
religio (So Paulo: Olho Dgua, 1997), p. 58).
12)
Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, p. 3.

12

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

driven to publicity, having to use criteria accessible to all for the exposition of
its arguments, especially in the context of fundamental theology.13
Unlike fundamental theology, systematic theologies are concerned with the
interpretation of a particular religious tradition, which enables them to reach
audiences in a diffferent way. According to Tracy, while fundamental theology
seeks to become public in the sense of being accessible to any reasonable and
rational person, systematic theology, although initially private, also can achieve
a genuine publicity precisely because of, and not despite, a heightened particularity.14 For Tracy, all classic work of humanity, in the radical particularity of its
origin and expression, is public in the following sense: grounded in an already
realized experience, bringing attention to something; the classics are presented
as revealing cognitive meaning and truth and are able, therefore, to operate an
ethical transformation of historical, social and personal life.15 The particularity
of religious experience thus can be relativized in favour of the universality
which it expresses and represents.
In any case, the emphasis on aspects shared by all human beings remains in
the universal model of Tracy. If in the context of fundamental theology particularity is seen in opposition to universality, in the context of systematic theology particularity is envisioned as integral to universality, in a metonymic
function. The recognition that the deep contents of faith are universally shared
will require, according to Tracy, the development of a theology capable of
articulating these contents in an accessible way. The universal model must
unfold, therefore, in an apologetic model, which uses criteria accessible to all
people to present its claims to truth.
Factual Model
The publicity of theology is not a task to be pursued: it, through the action of
diverse religions and their faiths, is inevitably made public, in the sense of
achieving visibility (the model of disclosure) and/or scope beyond the particular (the universal model). The factual model difffers from the previous two for
taking the public existence of religion and, by extension, of theology as an
13)

Tracy distinguishes between fundamental, systematic and practical theology: in more traditional Aristotelian language, fundamental theology deals principally with dialetics and metaphysics, systematic theology with rhetoric and poetics, and practical theology with ethics and
politics (Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, p. 85).
14)
David Tracy, Defending the Public Character of Theology. The Christian Century, 1 (1981),
35056 at 353.
15)
Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, p. 132.

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

13

empirical reality for granted independent of possible theological justifications.

It is a factual perception taken as a starting point for a public theology that
critically and constructively analyses that reality. In other words, the crucial
issue for a public theology is not the question of publicizing faith, but the critical analysis of the way in which that faith is already being made public.
For Ronald Thiemann, Christians deal constantly with issues of a public
nature. Decisions regarding, among other things, abortion, the care of disabled
newborns or racial divisions within the community of faith itself move beyond
the limits of the purely individual and private.16 The socio-political context
greatly influences the moral judgement of each individual. The line between
public and private, as well as between the personal and political, cannot be
precisely defined, to which Ronald Thiemann concludes that, if moral decisions have, inevitably, a public and political dimension, moral and theological
reflection must help Christians to deal responsibly with that dimension. It is
public theology, therefore, that must seek to understand the relationship
between Christian beliefs and the broader sociocultural context.
In the view of Max Stackhouse, the convictions of faith possess a deeply personal character. Each person holds a beliefreligious or notconcerning the
reality of a deity or cosmic power. Even people who claim to have no religion
have some belief that takes its place (such as an ideology or life philosophy).17
Nevertheless, religions are not only a personal and private fact; they are inevitably expressed publicly through movements, temples, monuments and so on.
Religions, they spill over the boundary of inner beliefs and individual
convictions; they shape, at least, the public presence of the individual. If
beliefs live in the inner heart and mind; they also have an outer face.18 In sum,
16)
These cases not only illustrate the conflicting demands that characterize contemporary Christian decision making; they also reveal the inevitable public dimension of situations that once
might have been considered to be purely private. Although decisions regarding abortion and
the care of handicapped newborns are intensely personal, they are influenced by contexts that
are public and political in nature. The line between private and public, between the personal
and the political, can no longer be drawn with absolute clarity (Ronald Thiemann, Constructing
a Public Theology: The Church in a Pluralistic Culture (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press,
1991), p. 19).
17)
Stackhouse, Reflection on How and Why we go Public, 422. Stackhouse shows his appropriation of the Tillichian conception of religion. For Tillich, faith, as unconditional concern that
demands total commitment and, at the same time, promises ultimate fulfillment, is independent
of what or whom it is directed toward. Paul Tillich, Dinmica da f (7th edn, So Leopoldo:
Sinodal/IEPG, 2002) [available in English as Paul Tillich, Dynamics of Faith (New York: Harper
Perennial, 2001)].
18)
Stackhouse, Reflection on How and Why we go Public, 423.

14

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

Stackhouse concludes that religion, despite having a private dimension, forms

associations and constitutes practices that express peoples beliefs; frames the
space and time of society, as the manifestations of faith are assimilated by it
over time; forms the character of a person and how s/he will behave in society,
which is nearly always unconscious.19

Perspectives on Actualizing Public Theology

The action models are characterized by answering the question as to in what
way it is possible or necessary to proceed so that the publicity of theology is
reached: by addressing diffferent audiences, sticking to the issues at stake in
society, being a contextual and politically militant theology or through dialogue in the public sphere? The answers to these questions determine the
models of public theology identified as distinct perspectives of acting: the audience model, the apologetic model and the contextual model.
Audience Model
The term public, as a noun, denotes a set of people for whom a particular
message or event is intended or who possess common characteristics or interests. There are younger publics, the consuming public, the audience of a
show. Tracy speaks of diffferent publics of theology: society, academy and
church. The publicity of theology, for Tracy, must be reached from and speak
to these three audiences that form the public; that is, the audience of theology.20
Among these diffferent audiences, there will certainly be a primary recipient,
although not exclusively so. For example, in the case of the public theology
programme in the Humanitas Institute of the University of the Vale do Rio
dos Sinos, in So Leopoldo, the focus is dialogue with the academy and, by

19)

Ibid., 424.
David Tracy, A imaginao analgica: a teologia crist e a cultura do pluralismo (So Leopoldo:
Unisinos, 2006), pp. 1972 [in English, The Analogical Imagination]. The idea of diffferent publics
is recurrent in the literature on public theology. Stackhouse, for example, mentions four publics:
the religious, political, academic and economic; see Max Stackhouse, Public Theology and Ethical Judgement, Theology Today, 54:2 (1997), 16579 at 1667. Smit, in turn, diffferentiates between
the political sphere, economic sphere, civil society and public opinion; see Dirk Smit, Modernity
and Theological Education: Crises at Western Cape and Stellenbosch?, in Dirk Smit, Essays
in Public Theology: Collected Essays, ed. E. Conradie (Stellenbosch: Sun Press, 2007), pp. 7599
at pp. 8895.

20)

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

15

extension, contemporary society. Sometimes, asserts Tracy, the influence of a

social locus can prove powerful enough to efffectively determine theology.21
First, society, for Tracy, is composed of three realms: the realm of technoeconomic structure, the political realm and the cultural realm.22 In the technoeconomic realm, we are faced with the ineptitude of values focused on
technology to define the ends of politics and culture.23 The domain of politics
concerns social justice and the use of power: This involves the control of the
legitimate use of force and the regulation of conflict (in libertarian societies
under the rule of law), in order to achieve the particular conceptions of justice
embodied in a societys traditions or its constitution.24 The cultural field refers
to the symbolic expressions of a society, covering aspects such as art and religion and even reflection on these expressions in the forms of cultural critique,
philosophy and theology.25
Secondly, the academy describes the social locus where the study of theology happens more often, although the proper place of theology in this context
is still an open question.26 Ethicist Jos Roque Junges, in an interview, defines
public theology as the presence of Christian faith in the university in two specific senses: letting itself be questioned by the challenges of science and, at the
same time, being a critical presence in the face of the assumption of the paradigm of modernity present in science and in society. Thus, he states: Therefore, public theology, on the one hand, lets itself be challenged by the sciences
and, on the other hand, also critically challenges the sciences in their assumptions.27
Thirdly, the church, as an audience, is a community of moral and religious
discourse in which the theologian is embedded. One objective of the discourse
directed to the churches is to clarify the contents of Christian faith among
21)

Tracy, A imaginao analgica, p. 23 [in English, The Analogical Imagination, p. 5].

Ibid., pp. 2642 [in English, pp. 614].
23)
Ibid., pp. 3031 [in English, pp. 89].
24)
Ibid., pp. 278 [in English, p. 7].
25)
Ibid., p. 28. Tillich, whose theology is marked by a deep interest in the relation between religion and culture, points to the need to articulate a theology in dialogue with the human situation,
responding to questions of contemporary existence. The analysis of the human situation, according to Tillich, employs materials used for the creative self-interpretation of the human being in
the diffferent realms of culture. Paul Tillich, Teologia Sistemtica (So Paulo: Paulinas; So Leopoldo: Sinodal, 1984), p. 60 [available in English as Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology: Reason and
RevelationBeing and God (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967)].
26)
Tracy, A imaginao analgica, pp. 423 [in English, The Analogical Imagination, pp. 1421].
27)
Incio Neutzling, ed., O que a teologia pblica traz de novo: entrevista com Jos Roque Junges
SJ, Cadernos IHU em formao, 2:8 (2006), 58 at 6.
22)

16

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

those who already believe or to guide Christian practice in the world.28 The
second objective implies the idea that the churches have a mediating role
between individuals and society; hence, by their practice, theology can have a
wider reach. Tracy maintains: Through their individual members and more
rarely through their institutional weight, the churches may directly afffect the
policies of the society as a whole.29 In this sense, theological discourse directed
at the churches has a chance, through its actions, to reach the wider society.
Apologetic Model
If Christian theology wants to contribute to discussions concerning matters of
public interest, it will not sufffice simply to appeal to Scripture or Christian tradition; this does not mean that it has to renounce elements that are specific
but, rather, to defend its truth claims in a way accessible to others in the public
sphere, through a form of argument that is open and an accessible style of communication.30 Gods logic is not identical to the logic of the discourse about
God; the latter can be critically evaluated.31 The apologetic model is based,
thus, on the assumption that theology can be articulated in a universal manner; in a way accessible to anyone using methods of reasoning accepted by all.
The apologetic model is opposed to a dogmatic and confessional stance and so
does not resort to authority or faith assumptions.
According to Stackhouse, there are three competing models of public theology: the confessional, the dogmatic and the apologetic. The confessional
approach does not believe that faith can be universally expressed and understood. Nevertheless, it seeks to address public issues, like abortion and war,
understanding that every public position is equally confessional. The dogmatic
approach, based on its own assumptions, makes doctrines explicit and, while
28)
Carl Braaten, Prolegmenos dogmtica crist, in Carl Braaten and Robert Jenson, eds,
Dogmtica crista, vol. 1, 3rd edn (So Leopoldo: IEPG/Sinodal, 2005), pp. 2931 [available in English as Carl Braaten, Prolegomena to Christian dogmatics, in Carl Braaten and Robert Jenson,
eds, Christian Dogmatics (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1984)].
29)
Tracy, A imaginao analgica, p. 55 [in English, The Analogical Imagination, p. 21].
30)
Linell Cady, A Model for a Public Theology, The Harvard Theological Review, 80:2 (1987), 193
212. See also Ronell Bezuidenhout and Piet Naud, Some Thoughts on Public Theology and its
Relevance for the South African Context, Scriptura, 79 (2002), 313 at 10.
31)
When criticized, theology should not simply appeal to something as Gods secret or the paradox of faith. Knowing that it the object is not Godself, but God-talk, it does not have this type of
attitude (Dietrich Ritschl, Zur Logik der Theologie: kurze Darstellung der Zusammenhnge theologischer Grundgedanken (Mnchen: Kaiser, 1994), p. 115) [available in English as Dietrich Ritschl,
The Logic of Theology (London: SCM, 1986)].

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

17

knowing that its points of view are not shared on a universal level, presents
them in public forums, in order to influence public opinion. Finally, the apologetic model, the stronger form of public theology in the perception of Stackhouse, claims that the deepest assumptions of faith are, and can be shown to
be, as reasonable, as ethical and as viable for an authentic, warranted commitment as any other known religion or philosophy and, indeed, indispensible to
other modes of public discourse.32
The apologetic model of public theology is closely linked to the idea of the
universality of faith. As Tracy explains, given the universal character of the
existential questions with which theology deals and the nature of the reality of
God upon which theology reflects, it should develop public (not private) criteria of discourse,33 which involves argument and evidence,34 especially with
regard to fundamental theology, which deals with areas like metaphysics and
dialectics. For Tracy, fundamental theology should seek to present arguments
that all people, whether religious or not, can accept as reasonable. In this form
of public discourse, theology appeals to experience, intelligence, rationality
and the responsibility of humanity according to criteria, in principle, accepted
by all, even if subject to refutation.35
32)
Max Stackhouse, Public Theology and Political Economy in a Globalizing Era, in William
Storrar and Andrew Morton, eds, Public Theology for the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Duncan
B. Forrester (London and New York: T&T Clark, 2004), pp. 17994 at p. 191. A similar distinction is
outlined by Stackhouse between the dogmatic, polemical and apologetic modes of theology: The
dogmatic approach strives to clarify dogma among those who already believe, the polemic
approach seeks to unmask false teachings and the apologetic aims to make the propositions of
faith accessible to those who doubt or dont believe. Public theology has to have aspects of all
these approaches, but its emphasis is strongly apologetic (Stackhouse, Public Theology and
Ethical Judgement, 168). More recently, Stackhouse distinguishes between the confessional, contextual, dogmatic and apologetic theologies: Confessional theology articulates what a specific
community of faith believes; contextual theology is based on the experience of a particular subculture and dogmatic theology clarifies specific formulations of faith, based on Scripture and in
the historical development of dogma. The apologetic, the primary focus of a public theology,
combines elements of these three perspectives, but emphasizes the possibility of articulating
their claims through a common language, given by secular, philosophical, or non-Christian
religious guidelines (Max Stackhouse, God and Globalization: Globalization and Grace, vol. 4
(New York and London: Continuum, 2007), pp. 105107).
33)
Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, p. xi.
34)
Ibid., p. 6.
35)
Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, p. 57. Consistent with the universal status of theology, it
should not take personal beliefs as support for the defence of truth, but some form of philosophical argument (normally an implicit or explicit metaphysic) (ibid., p. 64). Tracy considers it not
just possible but also necessary for theologians to remain open to any social-scientific method or

18

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

Theology articulated through universally accepted criteria does not imply

negating its origin in a particular tradition. Linell Cady, while maintaining an
important aspect of the Enlightenment model: the call for a public form of
inquiry against heteronomous authority, believes that a critical review of the
Enlightenment construction of public rationality is necessary, especially in its
abstract and reductionist concept of the public, which does not take into consideration the historicity of human reason. According to the model of public
theology proposed by Cady, theology need not ignore the contextual nature of
its reflection,36 but, at the same time, must abandon the dogmatic assumptions
of a traditional way of argument; in other words: Particularity need not prevent publicity.37 It was a fallacy of the Enlightenment interpretation to assume
that reason could operate outside local contexts, and without the influence of
particular traditions of interpretation.38
Contextual Model
Juan Luis Segundo writes that the content of theology is given, on the one
hand, by Christian tradition itself; on the other hand, it is given by the situation
in which the theologian lives.39 Public theologians similarly demonstrate great
interest in the contextuality of their theological task, arguing for the need to be
attentive to the issues at stake in a society, in order to articulate the content
specific to them in ways relevant to the context. Rudolf von Sinner, for example, considering the relevance of the theme of citizenship in the Brazilian context, proposes a theology of citizenship as public theology.40 Nico Koopman,
source available for theological dialogue, learning from empirical types of social sciences as well
as more critical types of social-hermeneutical theories. See David Tracy, Public Theology, Hope,
and the Mass Media: Can the Muses Still Inspire?, in Max Stackhouse and Peter Paris, eds, God
and Globalization: Religion and the Powers of the Common Life, vol. 1 (Harrisburg: Trinity Press
International, 2000), pp. 23154.
36)
Linell Cady, H. Richard Niebuhr and the Task of a Public Theology, in Ronald Thiemann, ed,
The Legacy of H. Richard Niebuhr (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), pp. 10729 at p. 115.
37)
Ibid., p. 118.
38)
Ibid., p. 114. Cady argues it is necessary to combine both the senses of public presented by
Tracy, recognizing the legitimate influence of a particular tradition and, at the same time, criticizing and reformulating this same tradition (Cady, A Model for a Public Theology, 197).
39)
Juan Luis Segundo, Libertao da teologia (So Paulo: Loyola, 1978), p. 10 [available in
English as J. L. Segundo, The Liberation of Theology (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1984)].
40)
Von Sinner argues that citizenship must go beyond the mere notion of rights and responsibilities as provided by law. People must experience themselves as an integral part of history; thus
the concept of citizenship must include the real possibility of access to rights and the recognition
of the responsibilities of the person, as well as the attitude toward the constitutional state as such,

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

19

from the South African context, considers issues such as economics, health,
racism, religion, crime and ecology as relevant to a public theology.41
The contextual model emphasizes the ways in which public theology already
may be contextually experienced, even without the explicit use of such terms.
John de Gruchy, for example, writes that located as it was within the Church
struggle against apartheid, public theology was deeply rooted in the life and
witness of the churches.42 Even academic theologians, he writes, were directly
linked to ecclesial life: academic reflection did not occur in isolation from
the practice of testimony; it was a theology of testimony, in which ethics,
especially social ethics, and ecclesiology were integrated. The contextuality
of theology is, in this view, largely achieved through the mobilization of people
and churches, so the concept of public theology tends to approximate public
church.
Due to the constant challenges that emerge in each context, public theology
needs to be permanently rearticulated, offfering new theological responses.
As contextual knowledge, theology has to be able to move between diffferent
themes, dealing with the issues of each time and seeking to contribute from its
specifics. Such a definition of public theology can, often, lead it to a concern for
the global, as issues that transcend the local and national environment are
considered. The literature on public theology has numerous examples of
approaches occupied by concerns not restricted to a particular context, though
deeply contextual, as is the case with gender, environmental issues and globalization. In a contextual perspective, it is assumed that each of these themes
can be glimpsed in distinct ways from each context. Globalization, for example,
has brought various consequences, depending on the country in question.43
and also the constant training and extension of citizen participation in the social and political life
of their country (Rudolf von Sinner, Confiana e convivncia: reflexes ticas e ecumnicas
(So Leopoldo: Sinodal, 2007), p. 53); see also R. von Sinner, Brazil: From Liberation Theology
to a Theology of Citizenship as Public Theology, International Journal of Public Theology, 1:34
(2007), 33863.
41)
Nico Koopman, Public Theology in (South) Africa: A Trinitarian Approach, International Journal of Public Theology, 1:1 (2007), 188209.
42)
John De Gruchy, From Political to Public Theologies: The Role of Theology in Public Life in
South Africa, in William Storrar and Andrew Morton, eds, Public Theology for the 21st Century:
Essays in Honour of Duncan B. Forrester (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 45.
43)
Here are some examples of approaches that, although not restricted to a specific context, are
consciously contextual or, if you prefer, inter-contextual: Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, Tilling and
Caring for the Earth: Public Theology and Ecology, International Journal of Public Theology, 1:2
(2007), 23048; Duncan Forrester, Theological and Secular Discourse in an Age of Terror: Two
Monuments, Two Worlds, in E. Graham and A. Rowlands, eds, Pathways to the Public Square:

20

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

In addition to the defence of a theology that deals with issues contextually

situated, the contextual model of theology, in its communal sense, can also
point out, against the apologetic model, the need for a greater connection
to the particularities of the Christian faith. Thiemann warns of the fact that,
from the intention to reach secular culture, the link to Christian roots has been
very easily lost. Therefore, our challenge is to develop a public theology that
remains based in the particularities of the Christian faith while genuinely dealing with issues of public significance.44 In the United States, the universalist
and contextual perspectives are represented, respectively, by the so-called
Chicago school, with David Tracy as its most eminent representative, and
the Yale School, with representatives like George Lindbeck, Stanley Hauerwas
and Ronald Thiemann. In some cases, the merging of both perspectives is
argued for.45

Conclusions: A Public Theology for Brazil?

The identification of diffferent models of public theology shows that the commitment to a public theology is truly pluralistic and inclusive. In the north or
south of the globe, public theology has been able to accommodate elements
from various theological currents of the last centuries, such as the missiological, the contextual or even liberal.46 The possibility of establishing connections
Public Theology in an Age of Pluralism (Manchester: International Academy of Practical Theology,
2004), 3140; Elaine Graham, Power, Knowledge and Authority in Public Theology, International
Journal of Public Theology, 1:1 (2007), 4262; James Haire, Public TheologyA Latin Captivity of
the Church: Violence and Public Theology in the Asia-Pacific Context, International Journal of
Public Theology, 1:34 (2007), 45570; Heather Walton, You Have To Say You Cannot Speak:
Feminist Reflections Upon Public Theology, International Journal of Public Theology, 4:1 (2010),
2136; Sebastian Kim, Freedom or Respect? Public Theology and the Debate over the Danish
Cartoons, International Journal of Public Theology, 1:2 (2007), 24969; Clint Le Bruyns, The World
of Work in South Africa: Succeeding and Struggling under Globalization, in C. Le Bruyns and G.
Ulshfer, eds, The Humanization of Globalization: South African and German Perspectives (Frankfurt am Main: Haag/Herchen, 2008), 17792; Marion Maddox, Religion, Secularism and the Promise of Public Theology, International Journal of Public Theology, 1:1 (2007), 82100; Dirk Smit and
Nico Koopman, Human Dignity and Human Rights as Guiding Principles for the Economy?, in
Le Bruyns and Ulshfer, eds, The Humanization of Globalization, 5970.
44)
Thiemann, Constructing a Public Theology, p. 19.
45)
Ernst Conradie, How Should a Public Way of Doing Theology be Approached?, Scriptura, 46
(1993), 328.
46)
The idea of mission as a divine activity of love that involves both the church and the world (as
found in David Bosch, Misso transformadora (So Leopoldo: Sinodal, 2002) [available in English

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

21

between theologies developed by authors as diverse as Gebara, Segundo and

Tillich shows the pluralistic and inclusive character of public theology. There
is no exclusive model but rather several public theologies, able to interact,
so that most authors can combine more than one model of public theology.
In the Brazilian case, in particular, the factual model shows its relevance due
to the new religious institutions that, contrary to Webers prognosis, are being
established in the country, with diverse public expression.47
The most recurrent models in the literature on public theology are that of
disclosure and that of audience: it is understood that God motivates the existence of a public theology, realized through dialogue with diffferent publics like
the church and society. The universal and apologetic models are specific to
North American literature, while the contextual model is strongly present
among South African theologians. North American theologians like Tracy,
Stackhouse and Cady tend to use the term public as a synonym for universal;
hence the importance of public theology using criteria of argument accessible
to all, at least in principle. South African theologians like Koopman, de Gruchy
and Smit, in turn, show that they see the term public to be a synonym of common, as a political category. In this latter sense, public theology is perceived as

as D. Bosch, Transforming Mission, new edn (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1991)]), for example, is especially
present in the model of disclosure. Elements of a liberal theology, in turn, are noticeable in the
idea of the articulation of theology through language and criteria of argument autonomous from
the Christian faith, as proposed in the apologetic model. As Gibellini afffirms, an important characteristic of liberal theology was precisely to harmonize the claims of the Christian religion with
the cultural conscience of the time (see Rosino Gibellini, A teologia do sculo XX , 2nd edn (So
Paulo: Loyola, 2002), p. 19.
47)
According to Paula Montero, these new institutionalities reflect an historical process of consensual constructions of what could be accepted as legitimate religious practice instead of the
purely magical threat to the public order. Due to the diffficulties of the state in implementing a
comprehensive health care policy, compacts were established with the Catholic church that
resulted in an appropriation of the Christian code of charity in the public arena. Over time, other
groups began, in the name of charity, to draw on their religious rituals to serve people. Currently,
social assistance operating from the notion of charity has taken on a great capacity for mobilization, expanding the public manifestations of these practices (Paula Montero, Religio, pluralismo e esfera pblica no Brasil, Novos EstudosCEBRAP, 74 (2006), 4765). Public theology as a
form of critical reflection on the role of churches in the public arena has been deepened, in Brazil,
by Rudolf von Sinner. Facing an increasingly diverse religious field, he considers important a
theological mediation both between faith communities and between these communities and
society in general, accepting as possible a contribution without imposition by theology (Von
Sinner, Confiana e convivncia, p. 63; Rudolf von Sinner, fffentliche Theologieneue Anstze
in globaler Perspektive, Evangelische Theologie, 71:5 (2011), 32743).

22

E. Jacobsen / International Journal of Public Theology 6 (2012) 722

able to contribute contextually in the struggle against racism, poverty, violence

and so on toward the common good of society.
The way public theology is conceived in South Africa approximates the
Latin American conception of theology, concerned with the liberation of
oppressed peoples. While the incipience of the reflection on public theology in
Brazil does not let a determinant perspective be identified, one would expect
that this Latin American tradition of liberation presents itself as determinative, generating a kind of public theology of liberation. Through the contribution of the various theologies of liberation, the global debate on public theology
can be deeply enriched. The commitment of these theologies to the oppressed
faces in our history reminds us especially of the fact that it is not enough for
theology to be noticeable in the public arena. If theology is not incarnate in the
pains, faith and hopes of all people, in each context, then it will be an empty
and irrelevant discourse. A public theology anchored in the lifeworld (to use
an expression of Jrgen Habermas), would be the appropriate form for any
theology that, mobilized by the sufffering of people, seeks to contribute to the
expansion of the communicative effforts of a society.