Review of Pamela McCarroll's 'Waiting at the Foot of the Cross' by Ron Dart

Pamela R. McCarroll, 

Waiting at the Foot of the Cross: Toward a Theology of Hope for Today

Foreword by Douglas John Hall 

Pickwick Publications 2014 

There has been, unfortunately so, a way of doing Christian theology that is more about success, glory and victory than of the cross. The theology of glory tradition, when delinked from the theology of the cross, too often panders to a politics of power—such a Eusebian like position genuflects to empires that embody and incarnate various forms of ruthless and subtle domination and mastery of the other (human and non-human).

There has emerged, gratefully so, two significant Canadian philosophical theologians, in the latter half of the 20^th century, that have dared to differ with the dominance of the triumphalist theology of glory ideology: George Grant and Douglas John Hall. Both men have made it abundantly clear that the dishonest tradition of the theology of glory distorts the depths of the suffering and vulnerable Christ: the God-Man of the Cross. The sheer beauty and rigorous probes of Pam McCarroll’s PHD thesis turned compelling read book is the way she accurately and accessibly renders the thinking of George Grant and Douglas John Hall transparent and window clear to the attentive reader---there is, in short, nothing opaque about this translucent and limpid book.

Waiting at the Foot of the Cross is about both the inner discipline of waiting and doing so at the foot of the cross—I never easy to attentively wait in such a graphic and raw place of gruesome suffering. Waiting at the Foot of the Cross is deftly divided into eight readable and incisive chapters: 1) Hope at the End of Hope, 2) Luther’s Theology of the Cross and Theological Method, 3) Grant’s Method of the Cross, 4) Hall’s Method of the Cross, 5) Theology of the Cross and Contextuality, 6) Grant on Mastery and the Possibility of Hope, 7) Hall on Mastery and the Possibility of Hope and 8) Toward a Theology and Practice of Hope.

The contribution and burnished gold nature of this book is the way Pam McCarroll has brought together the wide ranging nature of both Grant and Hall’s way of doing philosophy and theology---she has, wisely so, highlighted how both men are fine pointers and guides into a notion of hope that wards off a Pollyanna optimism and a form of realism that often turns cynical and skeptical. Grant and Hall have certainly looked into the heart of darkness and their way of attentive waiting to the message and meaning of the cross illuminates much in the pseudo-light yet deepening darkness of modern liberal progressivism.

The fact that Grant and Hall are Canadians makes this book a must read. Many Canadians are dutiful colonials—they constantly look elsewhere for the important thinkers and activists. The USA and England are often seen as the great and good places, polaris stars of sorts that guide woe begotten and disoriented Canadians.  The fact that George Grant and Douglas John Hall emerge from within the Canadian context speaks much about the richness and depth of the Canadian philosophical and theological tradition, a prophetic and countercultural tradition in many ways.

The “Foreword” by Douglas John Hall is worth many an ample reread. Hall makes clear that, in many ways, Grant was his teacher and guide, and the coup de foudre theology of Hall is a mature unpacking of the philosophical coup de grace of Grant’s undressing of liberalism in all its various forms and guises, chameleon like changes of colour to suit situation and context.

Waiting at the Foot of the Cross is an imperative read and should be on the bookshelves of all those interested and committed to the best of theology in its most mature form. Pam McCarroll should be lauded for her committed sleuth work to unearthing the mother lode of thought of Grant and Hall, enucleating their affinities and articulating their relevance for us in these early decades of the 21^st century—do read and inwardly digest this clear diamond of a book—the faith journey cannot but be enriched and deepened by the path provided. 

Ron Dart                            

Sheila Grant and 'Lament for a Nation' - Ron Dart

Sheila Grant and Lament for a Nation

George Grant always claimed that Lament for a Nation had been misunderstood.

— Sheila Grant, “Afterword,” Lament for a Nation

Lament for a Nation has been called “a masterpiece of political meditation” (Peter Emberley) and it “encapsulated the difference between the Tory vision for Canada and the continentalist, mechanistic, commercialist view” (Segal). There can be no doubt that this compact political missive summed up much about Canadian politics, political theory, philosophy and theology—it has, sadly so, been misread by ideologues that shrink Grant’s grander vision of thought and action to their tribal agendas.

Sheila Grant, after George had died (and significantly encouraged by William Christian—one of the finest Grant scholars), wrote an “Afterword” to Lament for a Nation—the “Afterword” is a must read for those keen and committed to a fuller understanding of the meaning and significance of Lament for a Nation.  I was fortunate to meet with Sheila Grant a few times (both at the Grant home on Walnut Street in Halifax and when she visited her daughters in Vancouver on the West Coast of Canada) and we, also, had a lengthy correspondence when she was alive (plus some fine phone conversations)—we talked much about her journey with her husband, George Grant, and the multiple misunderstandings of Lament—Sheila’s “Afterword” succinctly articulated many of her legitimate concerns.

George Grant and the Anglican Church of Canada: A 20th Century Prophet - Ron Dart

But there are remnants left around me…very strange remnants…in this case the Anglican Church which has in it some of the ancient truth and therefore I will live within it. – George Grant

Liberalism was, in origin, criticism of the old established order. Today, it is the voice of the establishment. – George Grant

George Grant was Canada’s most significant public philosopher, meaning that his public was Canadian. – Graeme Nicholson

They are foolish and ill-educated men who don’t recognize that, when they get into bed with liberalism, it won’t be they who do the impregnating—but that they will be utterly seduced.  – Grant letter to Derek Bedson Sept. 21 1965                  

          

Part I

The inside flap on the recent book about George Grant, Athens and Jerusalem: George Grant’s Theology, Philosophy, and Politics (2006), says this: “George Grant (1918-1988) has been called Canada’s greatest political philosopher. To this day, his work continues to stimulate, challenge, and inspire Canadians to think more deeply about matters of social justice and individual responsibility. However, while there has been considerable discussion of Grant’s political theories, relatively little attention has been paid to their theological and philosophical underpinnings”. There is little doubt, in short, that Grant was the most important Christian public intellectual in Canada in the latter half of the 20^th century, and for those who take their faith with some intellectual seriousness, much can be learned from George Grant the prophet, theologian, philosopher and engaged thinker.

Athens and Jerusalem walks the extra mile to highlight the deep theological well where Grant turned to slake a thirsty and parched soul. There is more to Grant, though, than the theological and philosophical underpinnings for his public vision. George Grant was an Anglican, and, sadly so, his Anglicanism has often been ignored. In the midst of the culture wars in the Anglican Church of Canada, Grant can offer us a way through and beyond the theological and ethical tribalism of left and right, liberal and conservative that so besets and divides us these days.

There is a form of Christianity, well lived and articulated by Grant, that might be called the Classical Christian tradition. Such a read of the Christian drama can come as a corrective to the liberal, conservative and fundamentalist versions of Christianity that often compete for dominance in the house of faith today. Grant’s classical understanding of the Christian and Anglican way can still teach us much about the esse of what we need to conserve.

The fact that Grant attended Upper Canada College (with Anglican roots and history), and the equally important reality that his father was principal of the school meant that Grant was exposed, when young, to the Anglican heritage from a variety of educational and liturgical levels. Grant did his BA at Queen’s University in Kingston (a strong Anglican and historic Loyalist stronghold) and he was offered a Rhodes scholarship to study at Oxford. It was at Oxford that Grant met, Sheila, his future wife (who had taken courses with J.R.R. Tolkien). George and Sheila moved to Halifax Nova Scotia after WW II where Grant was offered a position in the philosophy department at Dalhousie University. 

CLICK HERE for the rest of the article

George Grant: Amnesty International and Edward Said - Ron Dart

George Grant (1918-1988) is considered by many to be one of the most significant Canadian public intellectuals in the latter half of the 20^th century---Grant was also a High Tory of the highest calibre. Grant was a prolific writer and many have commented upon his wide ranging renaissance breadth. There has, of yet, been no essays on Grant and Amnesty International and Grant and Edward Said.

Amnesty International published The First Torturer’s Trial in 1975. Grant did a review of the book in the Globe and Mail (June 14 1977). 

The focus and reason for the publication of The First Torturer’s Trial was the trial in Greece in 1975 of 32 Greek police officers and military men who had tortured opponents in the junta from 1967-1974. The junta finally collapsed because of the courageous work of Archbishop Makarios (1913-1977) in Cyprus who had been elected as president in 1959, 1968 and 1973. Grant did a sustained commentary on the report, and, in many ways, Grant argued torture was the crudest form of the will to power of ideologues.

There are those on the political right that argue that it is the left that uses torture to inflict their will and way, and the left has argued that the right often uses torture to silence opposition. There can be no doubt that both totalitarian and authoritarian states of the left and right often use their wills to end meaningful civic and civil dialogue. Grant’s meditation on The First Torturer’s Trial brings this obstinate fact to the fore again and again.

Grant argues that “Torture is obviously the central crime against justice”. This means that central to Grant’s understanding of political thought and life is the quest for justice and the good—torture undermines both the good and justice. Grant makes it clear that to only focus on the 32 Greek military and police officers that did the torturing misses the deeper causes of those back of the torturers who justified and commanded the officers to engage, from 1967-1974, in torture as a state practice. The means was subverted for a dubious end and dissenters became disposable objects.

George Grant and Hinduism: Contemplative Probes - Ron Dart

Christianity seems in a certain way closer to Hinduism than it does to its fellow religions that arose in the East.

George Grant, George Grant in Conversation(1995) p. 176

In talking about a philosophical response, are we not supposed to have agreed upon understanding as to what philosophy is? And certainly one should not try to take advantage of the fact that there is no definition of philosophy on which all are agreed.  

John Arapura, Modernity and Responsibility: Essays for George Grant (1983) p.52       

Modern scientists, like the modern thinkers in Swift’s Battle of the Books,explain nature, human and non-human, the idea of soul, and not surprisingly they have produced a world where it is difficult to think what it means to be open to the whole. Ancient thinkers are compared to the bee which goes around collecting honey from the flowers; modern thinkers are compared to the spider which spins webs out of itself and then catches its food in that web.

George Grant in Dennis Lee, Poetry and Philosophy (1982)      

The recent book, Athens and Jerusalem: George Grant’s Theology, Philosophy, and Politics (2006), probed Grant’s deeper theological roots, but in the doing of this, Grant’s interest and affinity with the Orient and Hinduism was missed and ignored. This is a serious lack and weakness in an otherwise needed and necessary commentary on Grant.  

Grant saw himself as standing within the ‘Hindu wing of Christianity’, and, as mentioned above, he thought the contemplative and mystical core of Christianity made it ‘closer to Hinduism’ than to either the Jewish or Islamic traditions.

What did Grant mean by the statements mentioned above, and why was he, as a Canadian, at the forefront of probing greater contemplative depths in the Christian Tradition, and, by doing so, opening up new trails for interfaith dialogue?

Dostoevsky's Idiot and Holbein's Christ by Brad Jersak

The theologia crucis of George Grant, John Oman and Dostoevsky by Brad Jersak

George Grant on Oman’s theologia crucis

George P. Grant’s PhD dissertation focused on John Oman. And Grant’s theology of the Cross actually bears many of the marks of Oman’s theologia crucis. Both men held the Cross as central to all Christian theology, that faith (not reason) is essential to one’s knowledge of God’s love and forgiveness, and that God’s providence must ultimately remain a mystery. Both believed redemption was accomplished—consummated1—in Gethsemane and Golgotha. They believed that Christ is risen, but that Easter Sunday did not reverse a Good Friday defeat. The Resurrection was not a fulfillment, but a consequence of the Cross.2 Sheila illustrates Oman’s lingering impact on Grant by comparing an analogy common to each.

Oman: “The theologia gloriae sees on the cross ‘the King in rags, who will soon tear off his disguise and show himself in triumph.”

Grant (1976 lectures at McMasters): “There is a ghastly way of speaking about the Resurrection in the modern world which I call the fairy-tale way. A prince is dressed in rags, and everybody scorns him. Suddenly the clothes are pulled off and he appears in his prince’s costume, and everybody treats him well.”3

But Grant also critiques Oman’s theology as insufficient—too simple, triumphant, and voluntaristic for moderns whose faith is shattered by despair. Oman’s vision is beautiful as far as it goes: Grant acknowledges Oman’s Cross as a prophetic revelation of the Father’s love, the Son’s forgiveness, and the call to “find joy in the world by the knowledge that all can be redeemed.”4 It also reveals God’s call to an ethic of forgiveness: “Oman’s faith is that Our Lord on the Cross reveals the Father as Love, Who demands from men that they take up their crosses in forgiveness. The Father’s Love and man’s freedom to partake of it are the essence of Christianity.”5 But something is missing. By resisting Oman, Grant tells us his own story—how this simplicity is marred by the reality of doubt and despair that comes with extreme affliction.

To read the rest of this article:  Download Grant Oman Dostoevsky

Good Friday - 1951 by George Grant

Good Friday [1]

O dearest word, the very Word indeed,

Breathes on our striving, for the cross is done;

All fate forgotten and from judgement freed,

Call Him then less - Who shows us this - Your Son?

Look it is here, at death, not three days later,

The love that binds the granite into being.

Here the sea's blueness finds its true creator,

His glance on Golgotha our sun for seeing.

Nor say the choice is ours, what choice is left?

Forgiveness shows God's Will most fully done.

There on the cross the myth of hell is cleft,

And the black garden blazes with the sun.

Hold close the crown of thorns, the scourge, the rod,

For in His sweat, full front, the face of God.

---

[1] S. Grant, “Grant and the Theology of the Cross” (1996), 248 (citing United Church Observer 13.6 (15/05/1951): 16).