Theological Conflicts of the Nouvelle Théologie

Intellectual historians have constructed a largely unchallenged narrative that seeks to situate and interpret the 20th century theological movement of renewal widely called `Nouvelle théologie`. According to this narrative, an arid (Neo)scholastic system, incapable of meeting the challenges posed by the Modernist crisis, was met by the more vital `Nouvelle théologie`, whose impetus led to the renewals achieved at the Second Vatican Council. Prominent in this narrative is the, in our view misleading, tendency to portray the Nouvelle théologie as a cohesive and united front against a homogeneous (Neo)scholasticism, thereby constructing a juxtaposition between the two. It seems to us that this portrayal does not do justice to the diversity and conflicts within the Nouvelle théologie. Preliminary evidence indicates that there was more disagreement and conflict within this movement of renewal than the prevailing narrative suggests. One of the most prominent leaders of the movement, Yves Congar, in hitherto understudied periodicals and letters, criticized various other theologians who were, with him, associated with the Nouvelle théologie, such as Henri De Lubac. These disagreements must be highlighted and analyzed with a view towards challenging the existing and establishedhistorical narrative and showing that the Nouvelle théologie was not only a diverse movement, but one shot through with divergent interests and marked by conflicting theological positions.

Given the early termination of the project, there are unfortunately no scholarly/scientific publications to report. The major breakthrough for the project was the fact that the researcher realized that aspects of the project itself merited more research, and hence, the trajectory for the project changed.