No Community Without Boundaries, Need to Hold Loosely?

"It seems that this requires a twofold emphasis and corrective, First, Ward’s skeptical stance with respect to boundaries should be jettisoned for a post-critically dogmatic stance that asserts the necessity of boundaries as the condition for community. As Reinhard Hutter has argued, there can be no ‘public’ without borders: ‘An unlimited, altogether open space does not constitute a public. Openness in all directions actually destroys any public.’ [Reinhard Hutter, ‘The Church as Public: Dogma, Practice, and the Holy Spirit,’ Pro Ecclesia 3 (1994): 347.] Second, the conception of the church as counter-polis must be deeply pneumatological. As Hutter suggests, improvising on Kant, ‘Pneumatology without ecclesiology is empty; ecclesiology without pneumatology is blind.’ The assertion of an ecclesial antithesis requires a more persistent Augustinianism that resists the tendencies to make the human community coextensive with the ecclesia by recovering the centrality of the Spirit’s operation in the work of regeneration (and sanctification) and risking the scandalous affirmation of the utter particularity of that work in the community of the elect, while still constructing the community as one of welcome and hospitality. Such a pneumatological ecclesiology, particularly with an emphasis on regeneration, can be found in both Kuyper and Calvin. In other words, an ecclesiology that construes the church as polis requires a robust pneumatology and a recovery of the doctrine of election, providing the shape of an ecclesiology that is Reformed, catholic, and charismatic. In this respect, RO stands in need of reform."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 258-59

Grace Through Nature, All 'Within' Church?

"Milbank’s theology of nature as always already graced tends toward a similar blurring of the orders of creation and redemption and therefore the group that constitutes humanity and the community that constitutes the ecclesia. Because the gift of grace seems to be immediately ‘lost and renewed’ (BR, 27) by God’s ‘immediate correction’ (BR, 42) – and because this seems to be a universal gift and renewal (BR, 169) – there seems to be a sense in which none of this “is exactly ‘outside’ the Church’ (BR, 121)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 258

Mixed City of God and Boundaries of the Church

"Invoking Augustine’s account of the ‘interwoven’ (permixtum) relation of the two cities, Ward concludes to ‘a necessary agnosticism’ (CG, 228-29). Therefore, not only does he resist identifying the church with the heavenly city – as Augustine rightly counseled against (CG, 229) – but he is also reticent to identify boundaries of this earthly human institution (CG, 257-58)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 257

Subversive Formation of Worship

"Sacramental worship is the primary site for the reformation of human desire, which, in a capitalist world, can only be a subversive, countercultural gesture."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 254

Capitalism's Presuppositions of Human Nature

"By considering capitalism as a (globalized) technology of desire, Bell unveils its theological1 (albeit idolatrous) freight. Far from being merely a ‘neutral’ mode for economic distribution, capitalism is a particular religious (and imperial) vision of ‘basic human longings’ (Fukuyama) or desires. Capitalism, then, is not merely an instrument or tool that can be put to work as a servant of other substantive construals of the Good; rather, it proposes its own account of the telos to which human desire ought to be aimed (consumption and accumulation). … Not only does capitalism deform the creational structure of desire, but it also lays waste to God’s creatures and creation."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 251

Liberalism as Worldview and Competing Gospel

"It is in this sense that we must appreciate the way that liberalism is a worldview and therefore fundamentally religious (or theological1) – and therefore a gospel competing with the gospel of Christ. John Owen is helpfully forthright in describing liberalism in these terms: ‘Liberalism is first a worldview, a set of fundamental categories through which individuals understand themselves and the world. It thus shapes individuals’ conceptions of their identities and interests by telling them of what human nature and the good consist’ (John Owen IV, Liberal Peace, Liberal War [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997], 19)."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 250

Economy as Most Prevalant Idol

"One could see Johns Howard Yoder’s and Hauerwas’s analyses largely working within a paradigm in which the state is the looming idol that the church is most tempted to worship. But Bell suggests that this is a dated and therefore somewhat impotent mode of analysis and critique, for in a globalized world it is no longer states that wield imperialist power but rather capitalism and the market." (p. 248)

"Every aspect of society – schools, athletics, even the church – must insert itself in the capitalist machine. Capitalism, then, is the new empire the gospel must oppose because it demands an allegiance that rivals allegiance to Christ." (p. 249)

"‘The conflict between capitalism and Christianity is nothing less than a clash of opposing technologies of desire,’ for each is trying to form very different people for very different ends.’ (Bell, LTAEH, 2)" (Book is Liberation Theology After the End of History, quoted in Smith)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Love of God as Created Good, Not Based on Lack

"The primary intentional relation of the self to its world is not theoretical reflection (Husserl) or pragmatic concern (Heidegger) but rather love (Augustine)." (p. 244)

"As such, human desire is not the result of a lack of privation but rather plentitude and excess – a positive movement toward God. Desire, then, is not the negative craving for a lack but the positive passion characteristic of love." (p. 244)

"‘When Bernard [of Clairvaux] asserts that humanity lost its likeness, he is saying that human desire is no longer in harmony with the desire from whence it came’ (Bell, Liberation Theology after the End of History p. 90-91). The fall was not the occasion for the advent of desire but rather the distortion and misdirection of the creational structure of desire." (p. 245)

"First, desire is located in God, and God cannot be characterized by lack of privation but only by plenitude. ‘God does not love us because God needs us to complete God’s own desire’ – and yet God does love us (CG, 77) A Christian theological1 account of desire ‘begins with God’s desire for me (a prerequisite for any doctrine of election and hence redemption)’ (TST, 187). Therefore, God’s desire does no operate according to a logic of privation, then two problematic scenarios would follow: Either the desire could never be satisfied, in which case we could never achieve peace and rest, or the desire would be satisfied, in which case eternity would shut down (contra Gregory of Nyssa’s picture in his commentary on Song of Songs). ‘There is a profound difference between participating in God and a need for God. In the Christian tradition.’ Ward notes, ‘God is not there to fulfill human demands. For that is to treat God as we might treat any other commodity in the marketplace’ (CG, 77). Here we see a marked difference between a properly Christian account of desire and the erotic paradigm adopted by contemporary evangelical worship, which operates according to a logic of privation and construes God as yet another commodity to satisfy a lack." (p. 246)

"The erotic structure of the creature can take different directions, and these different intentions are the products of the formation of desire by particular stories narrated by particular communities and enacted by particular disciplines. RO is concerned to analyze the specific forms of desire produced by different communities and to articulate the antithesis between these and the church as the site for authentic eros." (p. 247)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Any Universal Ethic Minimalist and Dangerous

"Because of the framework of antithesis assumed by both RO and Hauerwas, any notion of a ‘common’ morality or universal ethics must be jettisoned, along with any project of deriving morality from a perduring ‘natural law’ that holds for all communities (because nature has been obfuscated by sin such that there is no perduring ‘humanity’). Rather, as Hauerwas puts it, ‘Ethics always requires an adjective or qualifier.’ An ethic is tied to a particular ethos and thus must always be a qualified ethic (whether Jewish, Christian, pagan, liberal, etc.)."

"Hauerwas’s critique of natural law ethics is insightful here: ‘Emphasis on the distinctiveness of Christian ethics does not deny that there are points of contact between Christian ethics and other forms of the moral life. While such points frequently exist, they are not sufficient to provide a basis of a ‘universal’ ethic grounded in human nature per se. Attempts to secure such an ethic inevitably result in a minimalistic ethic and often one which gives support to forms of cultural imperialism,’ which can be taken to underwrite coercion (Hauerwas, Peaceable Kingdom, 60-61)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 240

Church's Practice Determined by Telos

"‘There can only be a distinguishable Christian social theory because there is also a distinguishable Christian mode of action, a definite practice. The theory explicates this practice… The theory, therefore, is first and foremost an ecclesiology’ (TST, 380)." (p. 232)

"To put this another way, the church is a community of peace, an authentic, positive peace of harmony, not the merely negative peace of stilled conflict. It is a community in which harmony is possible because it undoes the swirling eddy of self-love (and corresponding self-appointed teloi) by orienting the community toward a common telos that engenders charity." (p. 239)

"The Christian community, then, is a unique polis that is demarcated by (1) a distinct narrative that is recounted in distinct practices; (2) a different telos that transcends the contemporary order; and (3) the common presence of the Spirit at work among its members through Word and sacrament. As such, it stands in contrast to every other polis insofar as no other shares its narrative (the Scriptures) or is the site for the Spirit’s regenerative, sacramental, and sanctifying presence." (p. 239)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Against Dualism of Theory and Practice

"It [RO] also calls into question the dualism of theory and practice, aspects that are too often formulated as mutually exclusive – as when some suggest that we need to stop being so concerned with theology and just get down to the work of doing justice or proclaiming the gospel or that theoretical reflection is an inherently bourgeois abstraction that distracts us from practice. For RO, there is a symbiotic, reciprocal, and necessary relationship between the two. Here again, this sentiment echoes Herman Dooyeweerd’s understanding of the relationship between theory and practice, or what we could describe as the ‘theoretical attitude’ and the ‘everyday or natural attitude’ (ITWT, 13-17). Theory, in this respect, is diaconal and is itself a practice. This is why ideas matter, or; to put it differently, ontologies make a difference."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 232

Fundamental Good of Images and Passions

"Given the embodied structure of the human person, images (and imagination) play an essential role in human knowing and thus contribute to knowledge rather than deceive us. If images can be icons, and the imagination is a structural aspect of creaturehood, then the passions – as structural – can also be affirmed as fundamentally good, even if their direction can be distorted."
James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 229

Re-Enchanting the Material in Leibniz

"What Deleuze finds in Leibniz is a certain reenchantment of the material whereby nature is invested with a dynamism and a plentitude. The sensible or material world is no longer a veil of shadows but rather the site of ‘what’s happening,’ no longer a space of detention or exile to be escaped but the ‘theater of matter’ where the real is actualized." (p. 209)

"For Leibniz, doing justice to the worthiness of the Creator demands that one affirm the integrity of creation, in particular; the materiality of creation." (p.212)

"Malebranche’s solution would come to be known as occasionalism, attributing all activity of both body and soul to a direct, supernatural intervention by God. As Leibniz summarizes, according to occasionalism, ‘we are aware of the property of bodies because God produces thoughts in the soul on the occasion of the motions of matter; and when in its turn our soul wishes to move the body, they said that it is God who moves the body for it” (New System, ss12)." (p. 213)

"In contrast to this demand for constant divine intervention for creation to operate, Leibniz offers a theory of preestablished harmony that emphasizes the relative self-sufficiency of nature as ordered by the Creator." (p. 213)

"The occasionalist account of nature or creation provides a deficient creation – an inferior clock, as it were. For Leibniz, such an understanding of the structures of creation as deficient reflects back upon the deficiency of the Creator; just as a poorly made clock reflects the incompetence of its maker: While we may think that the occasionalist emphasis on the dependence of creation on the Creator would prevent an idolization of creation, Leibniz’s analysis points out that occasionalism posits this dependence in such a way that it denigrates the Creator by making creation’s dependence the result of an original deficiency." (p. 214)

"To provide an account of creational, material structures that is worthy of the Creator, Leibniz radically affirms the self-sufficiency of creation as created – what he describes as the “God-given nature of things” (letter ss7). The result, however, is an account of creational structures that, at first sight, seems to construct a plane of immanence without reference to the Creator – an almost deistic account of nature operating autonomously. If we look closely, however, we see that this is not the case." (p. 214)

"Theories of nature that require a perpetual governance by God are, according to Leibniz, denigrations of the Creator; for what would we think of a clock maker who needed to constantly turn the hands of the clock manually?" (p. 216)

"Such an ontology must begin from the integrity of creation as the theater of the Creator’s glory without the Platonic desire to peek behind the curtain, for this Platonic desire assumes that what appears on stage is a farce, a deceptive melodrama distracting us from the real story behind the scenes. But neither should we fall prey to the nihilistic conclusion that the stage is merely a simulacrum – an image without an original or a zone of immanence without reference to transcendence. In contrast to both of these, a creational ontology affirms that “all the world is a stage.” There is no pristine, immediate access behind the scenes; rather, the invisible is seen in the visible, such that seeing the visible is to see more than the visible. This zone of immanence is where transcendence plays itself out, unfolding itself in a way that is staged by the Creator." (p. 222-3)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Sounding Out Idols ... And Icons

"Thus, more than just ‘sounding out idols,’ Deleuze’s project is the ‘overturning of icons’ insofar as icons are intended to be window that take us ‘beyond’ immanence. According to Deleuze, this iconic desire itself harbors a devaluation of immanence. In contrast, Deleuze’s virtual ontology urges us to stay with what appears, to celebrate immanence."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 209

Does Participatory Ontology Deny Creation's Integrity?

"RO’s participatory ontology can slide toward an occasionalism that requires the incessant activity of the Creator to uphold what would seem to be a deficient creation – a tendency to emphasize the creature’s participation in the divine to the extent that it seems the divine does everything. While seeking to undo the regnant secular concept of an autonomous nature, does RO’s participatory framework risk sliding toward an alternative model that does not grant any independence to the creation?" (p. 205)

The integrity of creation is seen as a third way between autonomy and occasionalism. (P. 207)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Emphasis Depends on Your 'Enemy'

"Below I note that this different horizon – and hence different ‘enemy’ – explains the difference of emphasis between RO and aspects of the Reformed tradition. If one is battling Gnostic escapism, then Plato still seems infected with the worst of diseases. If however, one is battling naturalistic materialism, then Plato can seem a powerful antidote and ally."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 197 note 35

Trinity As Archetype of Primordial Peace

"One finds in Christianity the ‘precise opposite of nihilism – a creed which rigorously excludes all violence from its picture of the original, intended, and final state of the cosmos’ (TST, 288). This stems frist from the doctrine of the Trinity, the arche in which we confess ‘a multiple which is not set dialectically over against the one, but itself manifests unity’ (TST, 376)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 196

Resonance of Primordial (Unfounded) Theological Claims

"The ontological claims regarding both univocity and original violence are theological1 claims that can be rejected in favor of a different theology1 that – though ‘equally unfounded’ (in the sense of a universal, rational demonstration)- may be better able to do justice to the arena of our experience and avoid the ‘antinomies’ of secular reason (TST, 362ff.)."

"The point is that, though, Milbank’s account is nonfoundationalist, it is not without warrant." (note 31)

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 196

Analogical Ontology and Original Violence

"Without recourse to a notion of analogical relation, immanentist ontologies conceive of difference in terms of opposition and thus assume a kind of primordial violence in the order of being. Reality is seen as inherently ‘conflictual’ (TST, 296), and thus all relationships are but war by another means (TST, 282). By subscribing to an original or transcendental violence, these ontologies of immanence end up ontologizing the fall as a structural feature of finite existence (TST, 302)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 195

Incarnational Ontology

"The shape of this theological1 or participatory ontology is nonreductive and incarnational: On the one hand, it affirms that matter as created exceeds itself and ‘is’ only insofar as it participates in or is suspended from the transcendent Creator; on the other hand, it affirms that there is a significant sense in which the transcendent inheres in immanence."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 191

Saving the Appearances by Exceeding Them

"‘The theological perspective of participation actually saves the appearances by exceeding them. It recognizes that materialism and spiritualism are false alternatives, since if there is only finite matter there is not even that, and that for phenomena really to be there they must be more than there… This is to say that all there is only is because it is more than it is.’ (RONT, 4)"

From Radical Orthodoxy: A New Theology, by: John Milbank
quoted in: James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 189

Participation As Antidote to Nihilism & Fundamentalism

"‘Only transcendence, which ‘suspends’ things in the sense of interrupting them, ‘suspends’ them also in the other sense upholding their relative worth over-against the void’ (RONT, 3)."

"A participatory ontology, then, is the antidote to both nihilism and fundamentalist dualism."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 189

No One Says: 'Look At Their Rationales!'

"Webber points out that this ‘new’ apologetic is, in fact, ancient: ‘Tertullian, a church father of the late second century, declared that the pagans were astonished by how Christians related to each other and those outside of their community. In a pagan world where every person ‘lives for himself,’ the pagans don’t cry, ‘Look at the power of their rational arguments’ but “See how they love one another!’’

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 181 n. 115

The Church As Its Own Apologetic

"This narrative persuasion, as a ‘new apologetic,’ begins by pointing to the mythical status of competing ontologies and narratives and offers a counter-narrative from the Christian story that is embodied in practice (TST, 388, 398). The church does not have an apologetic; it is an apologetic."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P.181

Out-Narrating Competing Worldviews

"By taking us to the level of ground-motive or mythos, RO takes us to the site of incommensurability, where the rules of the game differ from mythos to mythos. Thus, the strategy cannot be one of demonstration but rather one of narration – or, more specifically, out-narration. If one is going to oppose the mythos of nihilism and original violence, ‘One’s only resort at this juncture, other than mystical despair, is to return to the demonstration that nihilism, as an ontology, is also no more than a mythos. To counter it, one cannot resuscitate liberal humanism, but one can try to put forward an alternative mythos, equally unfounded, but nonetheless embodying an ‘ontology of peace' ' (TST, 279). "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, P. 181

Sensus Divinitatis Senses Property of the Divine Not the Person of God

" As such, Plantinga still seems to construe Calvin's sensus divinitatis as if it were a kind of natural knowledge of God, but with merely muffled and distorted deliverances (215). In fact, he suggests that 'perhaps in some people at some times, the sensus divinitatis doesn't work at all' (215). This indicates a misunderstanding of Calvin. What Calvin points to is a sensus divinitatis, not a sensus Dei. In other words, there is a structural human propensity to worship a divinity, not to have some knowledge of the Creator God. This is precisely why it could never not be operative; it is a structural propensity. If it is not directed toward the Triune Creator, it is misdirected toward an idol."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 180 note #107

Fallenness of Reason; Apologetics Can't Provide Proof

"Thus, Paul advocates a mode of public engagement that rests not on demonstration but on proclamation, not on neutral universal logos but on a particular, scandalous kerygma (1 Cor. 2:1-5). The neutral, autonomous reason that would have to underwrite a project of demonstration has been forfeited by the fall. An important consequence follows: The project of apologetics - especially 'classical apologetics' - must be seen as an illegitimate project, illegitimate not because of its goal of witness or proclamation but because of its mode. Even if one suggests that only the 'preambles of faith' (such as the existence of God, the necessity of objective moral standards, etc.) can be demonstrated by appeal to a universal, autonomous reason, one has failed to grasp the scope and ubiquity of the fall. One is unwittingly guarding a sphere of creation that is untouched by sin."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 180

Levels of Theological Reflection

"The way to understand this - and this is what Milbank is after - is that theology1 should position all theoretical reflection, including philosophy. To put this slightly differently, theology1 should function as queen of the sciences but is not itself a science (as is theology2). What, then, is the relationship between theology1 and theology2? Dooyeweerd fails to appreciate the degree to which the biblical ground-motive and Christian confession are informed by theology2, even if the biblical ground-motive is not itself theology2. The creeds and confessions of the church - take uncontroversial examples such as the Apostles' or Nicene creeds - are pistically qualified claims of pre- and supra-theoretical confession and practice, but they are the fruit of theological1 reflection that has been appropriated and 'ratified' by the church as articulating its fundamental confession. Theology2, therefore, ought to be undertaken in the service of the church, and when it is fruitful, it will inform the church's confession articulated in theology1. "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 178

Theology As Not Queen, But Interpreter of Sciences

"Theology as a theoretical discipline should not be erected as queen of the sciences, as RO sometimes suggests. However, when RO calls for a theological account of economics or social theory, what it really means is a confessional account of economics that begins from a Christian worldview. But unlike Dooyeweerd, it wants that Christian worldview to reflect the fullness of Christian reflection - not just the goodness of creation but also the central themes of incarnation, Trinity, and sacramentality."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 177

Revelation as Direct and Non-Propositional

"In particular, he [Dooyeweerd] seems to eschew the mediation of revelation via language and tradition, thus allowing him to suggest that the revelation of the biblical motive can be communicated 'directly' to consciousness. Therefore, he faults the tradition for consistently 'confusing theoretical Christian theology with the true knowledge of God and true self-knowledge' (ITWT, 80-81).

The fact that this 'religious presupposition' (ITWT, 87) is not propositional (as Dooyeweerd rightly emphasizes) does not mean that it is not contentful or substantive. The content of this confession - as embodied, for instance, in the Apostles' or Nicene Creed - has traditionally been understood as theological in some sense. "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 175

Theology as First Order, Supra-Theoretical

"According to Dooyeweerd, we must not confuse theology as a second-order discipline of theoretical reflection with the biblical ground-motive or religious commitment, which is pre-theoretical (or supra-theoretical). Insofar as theology is understood as the special science of the pistic aspect, RO's project of positioning all other sciences in relation to theology would, in fact, amount to absolutizing one of the aspects of creation over the others - resulting in making theology (and/or the pistic aspect) an idol. The result would be a kind of theological reductionism akin to a naturalistic reductionism that reduces all the other aspects to the biotic."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 173

Reformed Worldview: Life is Religion

"Against the dualism of fundamentalism, which RO also seeks to subvert, the Reformed tradition has always emphasized that 'life is religion' - that worship of doxology is not confined to a religious compartment of human existence but rather spills over into every sphere of human activity, from agriculture to commerce, from recreation to parenting. Insofar as a life of discipleship must be predicated upon God's revelation of himself, all of life is to be guided and shaped by this self-revelation of himself, all of life is to be guided and shaped by this self-revelation of the Creator."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 170

Redemption Requires Truth and Means to Receive

"One finds basically the same point [of noting the corruption of the depravity of the mind by sin] in Kierkegaard's Philosophical Fragments: To come to know the truth, the learner (disciple) must receive from the Teacher (God) not only the content of the truth but also the very condition for receiving it."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 165-66

Quasi-Natural Theology

"I have some suspicions of late, Milbank - under the rubric of universalism - is rehabilitating a quasi-natural theology. This would stem from the fact that, even if he recognizes the noetic effects of sin (it is not clear that he does), for him, grace seems to be universally shed abroad in such a way that these effects are undone for all humanity. (BR, 106) "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 165

Intercepting God's Knowledge

" 'In knowing a tree...we are catching it on its way back to God' (TA, 12)"

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 159

Existence in Grace as Matter of Degree

"For Milbank and Pickstock, the distinction between nature and grace is not one of kind but of degree, in particular, the degree of intensity of participation in the divine. Therefore, it is not the case that nature is an autonomous in-itself to which a relationship to the divine is super-added; rather, nature is always already graced in the sense that it participates in the Creator (BR, 115). It is only insofar as it depends; its being is essentially a gift. Correlatively, insofar as reason is to faith as nature is to grace, the relation (and distinction) must be understood in the same sense: Reason is not an autonomous operation of a pure nature that supernatural faith supplements. Rather, reason is a reception of light, an operation of divine illumination (TA, 11)."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 160

Aquinas: Nothing Exists, IN Itself

"For Aquinas, one cannot recognize the truth of things merely by observing features of the natural (albeit created order 'without necessarily recognizing it as created' (TA, 23, emphasis added). 'Were one to attempt to comprehend a finite reality not as created, that is to say, not in relation to God, then no truth for Aquinas could ensue, since finite realities are of themselves nothing and only what is can be true' (TA, 23; cf. 33-34). So once again the ontology of participation undergirds this account: Things are not anything 'in themselves'; therefore, they cannot be understood 'in themselves but only by reference to that from which they are suspended - their Creator (TA, 22). As a result, no secular account of things could possibly be true."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 160

Assumptions of Secular Philosophy

"The question, therefore, is not whether theology presupposes a philosophy but rather what philosophy is will work from: Will Christian theology 'seek its philosophical foundations in a Christian philosophy, ruled and reformed by the central biblical basic-motive,' or will it 'take them from the traditional scholastic or modern humanist philosophy?' (ITWT, 107)" p.153

" 'It is vain illusion,' Dooyeweerd remarks, 'to imagine that the notions borrowed from such a [so-called autonomous] philosophy could be utilized by the theologian in a purely formal sense. They involve a material content which is indissolubly bound to the total theoretical view of experience and of reality' (ITWT, 105-106)." p.154

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy

Doing Theology with Hostile Framework

" One of the resounding aspects of Milbank's critique, then, is that Christian theological discourse (and ecclesial practice) has uncritically appropriated theoretical frameworks and philosophical categories that, in fact, are funded by commitments that are deeply antithetical to Christian confession and revelation."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 150

Correlating to the Secular Assumes its Precedence

"What all these forms of correlationist theology retain is a dualism between reason and revelation: Reason, the domain of the sciences, is conceded as an autonomous sphere that revelation either supplements (liberation theology) or overwhelms (Marion, Barth). In either case, the autonomy of theoretical thought goes unchallenged."

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 150

Postmodernism as Playing Field Leveller

"The critique, then, has a dual aim: On the one hand, Milbank seeks to unveil the deeply religious or even theological commitments that undergird supposedly secular social science (and other modes of knowledge); on the other hand, having unveiled that and thus leveled the playing field (showing that all claims to knowledge are, at root, confessional), Milbank seeks to reinvigorate distinctly Christian accounts of sociality (and other spheres of being-in-the-world). "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 146

Postmodernity as Opportunity for Church

"Milbank suggests that there is an 'inevitable, if wary, affinity, which must exist between Christianity and postmodernity' (BR, 196). This affinity is neither an identification of the two nor an accommodation of one to the other but rather the discernment of an opportunity afforded by the contemporary situation. Postmodernity's critique of modern epistemologies may represent a chink in modernity's armor that provides both an opportunity to launch an internal critique of modernity and occasion for the church to be alerted to its complicity with modernity."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 141

Church's Antithesis to Political Unity

"In seeking to achieve peace without grace (a correlate of an original war without sin), the state not only pretends to be a church or soteriological institution but must also save us from the church. If the telos of the state's mission is a unity without difference, a peace without faction, then 'the Church is perhaps the primary thing from which the modern state is meant to save us' (RONT, 188), for the church, as a transnational body, must necessarily both transcend the boundaries of the state and also be a fractive force within the state precisely because it asserts difference - an antithesis."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 134

Worship Challenging Caesar

'every worship service is a challenge to Caesar' (Leithart, Against Christianity, 67)

Quoted in: James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 133

The State As Salvific Institution

"Thus, 'the modern state is best understood... as a source of an alternative soteriology to that of the Church' (RONT, 182). The advent of modernity and the birth of the secular, therefore, do not entail the creation of a secular public space where the state merely manages temporal goods, distinguished from a private sacred space where individuals and communities are free to pursue a supra-temporal telos. The state does not take a merely temporal regulatory role and leave salvation in the hands of the church; rather, the modern state seeks to replace the church by itself becoming a soteriological institution."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 132

Only Option is True vs. False Religion

"…the ineradicable religious structure of human selfhood, when marred by sin, does not lead to irreligion or to no religion but to a distorted religion – in short, idolatry."

"… Even the democratic Sunday Times reader –committed to justice as some kind of end in itself – is committed to false gods."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p.115

No Virtue in Being Religious

"Unlike for Caputo, for Augustine there is no virtue in being religious. This is because, for Augustine (and earlier St. Paul and later John Calvin), being religious is constitutive of being human. Human beings – as created in the image of God – cannot help but be religious. Hence, being religious is not a notable achievement. We might describe this as Augustine’s account of formal or structural religion."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p.113

The Church IS the Politics

"But the Church does not have a cultural critique; it is a cultural critique. Its politics is an ecclesiology. "

James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p.80

Primacy of Liturgy for Theology

“Since god is not an item in the world to which we might turn,” Milbank concludes, “he is only first there for us in our turning to him. And yet we only turn to him when he reaches us; herein lies the mystery of liturgy – liturgy that for theology is more fundamental then either language or experience, and yet is both linguistic and experiential.” (Milbank, “Programme of Radical Orthodoxy,” 43) "


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p. 78

Only Transcendence Supports Immanence

"When the world is so flattened that all we have is the immanent, the immanent implodes upon itself. In contrast to such nihilism and materialism, only a participatory ontology – in which the immanent and material is suspended from the transcendent and immaterial – can grant the world meaning. …. Following Augustine, every created reality is absolutely nothing in itself…."


James K.A. Smith, Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, p.75