I am not a great fan of Paul Tillich’s theology. It is not that I don’t believe that theology needs to be put in modern vernacular, nor is the problem that Tillich expands on the core theology you can find in the Old and New Testaments.
The problem, it seems to me, is that there is in the final analysis so little in Tillich that resonates in any way with the language of Scripture once you really discover what he means by the words he uses. That is the problem, I assume, that one witty student was referring to when on the wall at St. John’s University, he (or she) scrawled:
And Jesus asked the disciples, “Who do you say that I am?”
And Peter responded, “You are the ground of our being, the eschatological telos of history.”
To which Jesus responded, “What????”
That said, Tillich does get some things right and one of the things he was particularly good at was framing questions. In one place, he argues that “Every serious thinker must ask and answer three fundamental questions:
(1) What is wrong with us?
(2) What would we be like if we were whole, healed?
(3) How do we move from our condition of brokenness to wholeness?
Answer those questions and you might get a new life.
Any suggestions for #3?
I’ll be one of your new Spiritual Direction students. So looking forward to learning from you. Lovin’ the book. Angie
Martha…that depends on your answers to questions 1 and 2. So, from my point of view (and yours, too, I would imagine), all deepest healing is comprehensive — it addresses the spiritual, emotional, and physical dimensions of our lives and all deepest healing looks to God (allowing that God works in, around , through and beyond the material realm. So, I would distinguish between healing (the complete restoration of our lives — which is a process we trust God completes in this life and the next) and cure (which is temporal and incomplete). God uses both to finally heal our deepest wounds and I find myself resting in that when I am burdened by a sense of the incompleteness in that process. I hope that helps.