De Moor I:28: The Genus of Theology

In § 28-31, the Genus of this Definition is explained.

In general, we call Theology a Doctrine or teaching, just as in the New Testament it is called a διδαχὴ/doctrine, John 7:16, 17;[1] a διδασκαλία/doctrine/teaching, 1 Timothy 6:3;[2] and both words occur at the same time in Titus 1:9.[3]  Now, it is Doctrine, as our AUTHOR rightly reminds, because, α.  it is taught by God, and, β.  it is learned by the Church.

But it is now asked, What sort of Doctrine is Theology, Theoretical or Practical? which Question was moved by the Scholastics, among whom Durandus, in his prolegomeno Sententiarum quæstionum VI, and others maintained that theology is purely speculative.  Scotus with his followers said that the same is purely practical.  But others said that it is mixed, that is, speculative and practical at the same time:  but either more speculative, like the Thomists; or more practical, Thomas de Argentina.[4]

Simon Episcopius

This question turned out to be of greater moment, because the Socinians and Remonstrants made the whole of Theology practical with a perverse intention, namely, so that they might separate the knowledge of mysteries, for example, the Trinity, the Incarnation, etc., from the fundamentals of Religion, and say that Religion is summed up in the obedience of precepts and the faith of promises.  Thus Episcopius, Institutionibus Theologicis, book I, chapter II, asserts that Theology is not a speculative science, but practical; neither is it partly speculative and partly practical; but a purely practical science.  This the Remonstrants also argue in their Apologia pro Confessione, pages 17, 18, in which they at the same time falsely accuse us, as if our Theology were merely speculative.

Indeed, Theoretical is the Discipline that is occupied in contemplation alone, and has no other end than knowledge.  Practical is the Discipline that does not stand in the knowledge of the matter alone, but in its own nature and of itself leads on to practice, and has activity as its end.

As so, if one or the other must be chosen here; it would be better to be said, yet with the error of the Socinians and Arminians put away, that Theology is a Practical Discipline, rather than a Theoretical Discipline; for, 1.  all knowledge of Religion is to be drawn unto practice, John 13:17; 1 Timothy 1:5:  2.  and the End, of the glorification of God and salvation of men, is Practical.

At the same time, HEINRICH ALTING, in his Theologia problematica nova, locus I, problem IV, page 15, and FRANCIS TURRETIN, in his Theologiæ Elencticæ, locus I, question VII, § 5, not incorrectly observe that arguments, which prove that Theology is either Theoretical or Practical, if they must be taken exclusively of one another, generally fail and restrict Theology too much:  but, if they be understood inclusively, are equally true; since they think that Theology is of a mixed sort.  And thus also the Censura Confessionis Remonstrantium has in § 31, “We confess that truth that is according to piety[5] is not merely speculative; but that it is to be held as merely practical, we do not approve, because a true sense concerning God and divine things also pertains to piety.  For one that is not well informed in his understanding concerning God and His will is not able rightly to worship God, nor to love his neighbor.”  Therefore, you might aptly call Theology a Theoretico-Practical Doctrine, which our AUTHOR also urges:  and this is proven by, 1.  the Object, which is God, to be known and worshipped as the first truth and highest good.  2.  The Subject, man, to be perfected in the knowledge of the truth, by which his intellect is illuminated; and in the love of the good, by which his will is adorned; in faith, which is extended unto πιστὰ, things to be believed, and in love, which is extended unto πρακτὰ, things to be done.  3.  The Principium, both external, the Word of God, which comprehends the Law and the Gospel; the Law sets forth things to be done, the Gospel things to be believed and known:  and internal, the Spirit, who is the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah, Isaiah 11:2.  4.  The End, proximate and immediate, theory of the true and praxis of the good, neither to be excluded, since only that knowledge of God is able to be true with which praxis is joined, 1 John 2:4; neither is praxis right and salutary, except that which is directed by knowledge, John 17:3.  Likewise, the End of Theology is the salvation of man:  but this also has been placed partly in the vision of God, partly in the enjoyment of Him.

Durandus

Many words are not now necessary to respond to the Objections of Durandus and others, and of the Thomists, who said that Theology is either merely or more speculative.

Objection 1:  That it is called Knowledge, John 17:3; etc.  Response:  1.  Theology is able to be denominated by one of its parts in this way:  2.  it is knowledge conjoined with practice, 1 John 2:4:  3.  and it is often understood as practical, which includes knowledge, faith, love, and the reverence of God.

Objection 2:  That the Object of Theology, which is God, is not πρακτὸν, a thing to be done, or a thing done by man.  Response:  This perhaps could be missing, if we should say that Theology is merely practical knowledge, not when we call it Theoretico-practical.  2.  But not every practical habit has an object πρακτὸν, to be done, operable, as indeed Ethics does, which teaches to do its object, that is, to produce virtues:  but that is also called a practical habit which teaches to do something concerning its object; and in this sense Theology is able to be called a practical habit, because it teaches to perform worship concerning God.  And so our AUTHOR well observes that the knowledge and worship of God are yet πρακτὰ, things to be done, and able to be rendered by man.

Objection 3:  That the Method of Theology is Synthetic.  Response:  Synthetic Method is opposed to Analytic.  Synthetic Method begins from a principium, and through its object and subject tends toward its end:  Analytic Method begins with an end, and proceeds to means.  They maintain that the former agrees more with Theoretical disciplines, the latter with Practical disciplines.  But, 1.  Method is arbitrary/ discretionary in handing on disciplines; and, 2.  it varies in various works, inasmuch as the Catechesis Heidelbergensis employs an Analytic Method.  On this Question consult HOORNBEECK’S Theologiam Practicam, preface, pages 5-17.

[1] John 7:16, 17:  “Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine (ἡ ἐμὴ διδαχὴ) is not mine, but his that sent me.  If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine (περὶ τῆς διδαχῆς), whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.”

[2] 1 Timothy 6:3:  “If any man teach otherwise (ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ), and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness (τῇ κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ)…”

[3] Titus 1:9:  “Holding fast the word faithful according to the teaching (τοῦ κατὰ τὴν διδαχὴν πιστοῦ λόγου), that he may be able by sound doctrine (ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ) both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.”

[4] Thomas of Strasburg (1275-1357) was a scholastic theologian of the Augustinian Order, serving as General of the Order from 1345 until his death.  He wrote a commentary on Lombard’s Sentences.

[5] Titus 1:1:  “Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness (ἀληθείας τῆς κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν; veritatis, quæ secundum pietatem est, in the Vulgate)…”