How to Think Theologically: Stone & Duke Reviewed
This paper offers a close reading of Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke's How to Think Theologically (1996), examining the authors' central argument that theology is not the exclusive domain of clergy or scholars but is practiced by all Christians in daily life. The paper explores key distinctions the text draws between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, the democratic and egalitarian implications of the authors' claims, and their insistence that authentic Christian faith requires a conscious acknowledgment of God in all aspects of life. The paper concludes by reflecting on the text's call for Christians to integrate theological awareness into worship, community, family, and individual action.
- Introduction: Theology as a Universal Christian Practice: All Christians engage theology through daily faith practices
- Egalitarian Implications of Stone & Duke's Argument: Theology belongs to all baptized Christians, not scholars
- Orthodoxy vs. Orthopraxy: Distinguishing hollow ritual from genuine Christian belief
- The Inseparability of God from Christian Identity: God and the gospel are central to authentic Christian action
- Conclusion: Living Theologically in All Areas of Life: Christians are called to consciously include God in everything
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper integrates direct quotations from the source text purposefully, using them to anchor each analytical point rather than as filler.
- It maintains a clear evaluative voice, identifying what is "most appealing" about the text and explaining why specific arguments carry strength.
- The paper moves logically from broad claims about theological accessibility to progressively more specific distinctions (orthodoxy vs. orthopraxy), demonstrating structured analytical progression.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper models close reading through sustained textual engagement. Rather than summarizing the book chapter by chapter, the student identifies and unpacks the book's central thesis — that all Christians are theologians — and traces how supporting concepts like orthopraxy and orthodoxy serve that thesis. This technique shows how to use a source's own terminology to build an argument.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a broad framing of theology as embedded in everyday Christian life, introduces the book and its democratic premise, then drills into the orthopraxy/orthodoxy distinction before concluding with the text's call for conscious God-centered living. This funnel structure — from general claim to specific concept to practical implication — is well suited to short analytical book reviews at the undergraduate level.
Introduction: Theology as a Universal Christian Practice
The practice of the Christian faith happens in every part of life, whether worshipping in the church, engaging in honest business practice, or holding the door open for a complete stranger. The book by Stone and Duke (1996), entitled How to Think Theologically, argues that these practices of faith are actually theological in nature. We may not always recognize it, but through our faith, we are all theologians. The text encourages us to think more consciously of God and the implications of His role in our faith.
Egalitarian Implications of Stone & Duke's Argument
What is immediately most appealing about the Stone and Duke text is the democratic implication of its central claim. Essentially, the text declares theology a subject not exclusive to religious scholars, clergy, or academics. Instead, the authors assert: "we hold a time-honored conviction that when Christians are baptized they enter into a ministry they all share, responding to a God-given call to disclose gospel (God's good news of Jesus Christ) through all they say and do. Their calling makes them witnesses to faith, and hence theologians as well." (p. 1)
This suggests an openness to the discussion of theology that is egalitarian in nature. As such, it reflects the humanist values of Jesus Himself. However, the text notes that we do have a responsibility to uphold in this arrangement.
Orthodoxy vs. Orthopraxy
Stone and Duke make a clear distinction between acting in the Christian spirit without truly committing one's faith and genuine Christian belief. The text refers to the former as orthopraxy — the practice of religion absent any true emotional or intellectual belief. Stone and Duke differentiate this from orthodoxy, in which one professes to adhere to the Christian faith but behaves in decidedly objectionable and unchristian ways. Both, the text argues, are counterintuitive to a true belief in God and Jesus Christ. This is why the incorporation of genuine theological consideration is so important.
According to Stone and Duke, "emphasis on orthopraxy has always been modified by warnings against merely going through the motions that appear truly Christian while covertly, in our heart of hearts, devoting ourselves to someone other than God and something other than God's message." (p. 9)
Conclusion: Living Theologically in All Areas of Life
Stone and Duke go on to say that thinking theologically means recognizing that the light of the gospel shines in every part of our life. God is inseparable from all the experiences that we have, whether it is His presence in good times or His comfort in bad times. Therefore, we are called to think of God and share His Word when we perform works of praise, charity, or general goodness.
Stone and Duke provide a sense of encouragement and conviction that, as Christians, we cannot help but think of and include God in everything we do.
Works Cited
Stone, Howard W., and James O. Duke. How to Think Theologically. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. Print.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.