Abstract

This study examines the work of Reinhold Niebuhr, Stanley Hauerwas, and Rosemary Radford Ruether and their understanding of the relation between church and the liberal political world of the United States. A major concern is their analysis and critique of liberal theory and practice. ;Niebuhr drew no sharp distinction between the church and the liberal world, in part because his principles of justice were grounded in anthropological convictions which bore important similarities to typically liberal anthropologies. Niebuhr overestimated those similarities, however--for example, Niebuhr's justice is more egalitarian than liberal justice. In addition, there are important reasons external to his framework which indicate that the distinction ought to be drawn more sharply. ;Hauerwas' critique of liberal theory and society and his conviction that the church should adopt a posture of selective non-involvement in the liberal world is shaped by his historicist epistemologist convictions. Hauerwas' contributions to the understanding of the church/world relation and his conception of human agency illuminates deficiencies in liberal theory and practice. However, he pays insufficient attention to the historical relationship between the church and liberal world and therefore, to the potential for dialogue between them. In particular the church can address the liberal world in the language of the common good. ;Ruether's secular theology of the church highlights the distinction between church and world in terms of the church's greater embodiment of the liberated humanity which is possible for all. Her analysis of the contributions and deficiencies of liberalism is with reference to her understanding of alienation as the source of human oppression. While Ruether makes important contributions to an understanding of the church/world relation and to the deficiencies of liberalism, it is limited by the fact that she never makes clear how the church's relationship to Jesus influences its understanding of alienation and liberation. As a result it is not clear how the church is distinguished from other communities of liberation