And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee the only true God.
John 17:3
By Robert Hoyle
You are great, Lord, and greatly to be praised; great is Your power, and infinite is Your wisdom. And man desires to praise You, for he is a part of Your creation; he bears his mortality about with him and carries the evidence of his sin and the proof that You resist the proud. Still he desires to praise You, this man who is only a small part of Your creation. You have prompted him, that he should delight to praise You, for You have made us for Yourself and restless is our heart until it comes to rest in You.[1]
Saint Augustine
It may seem odd to write in defense of theology in a day when books on the subject proliferate and it has been declared that every man, woman, and child is himself or herself a theologian. Assuredly the science is enjoying a veritable Golden Age, with so many practitioners and adherents. What would be the point of seeking to preserve something that is so prevalent? The problem is introduced when we scrutinize the modern definition of “theology”. Books published in the genre, far from dealing with “the facts of revelation” and their “dependencies and connections,”[2] run the gamut from pop-psychology and self-help to social commentary and economics. As to every man being his own theologian, the old saying may be adapted: “Once everyone is a theologian, nobody is a theologian”.
Further investigation will reveal the heart of the matter to be modern man’s contempt for the inherent goodness of truth. Far from esteeming that which is true to be desirable or noble of its own nature, mankind has descended through a process of involution to arrive at a place where the realm of human intellectual activity is regarded as valuable only in the pursuit of material ends. Materialism’s triumph over men and things has not excluded the realm of thought from its dominions. If a thought does not lead towards practical utility it is discarded as being of no advantage to the thinker.
Traditionally, thought and activity were divided into the dual realms of practical and speculative. The aim of the speculative was to know things as they truly are, while the aim of the practical was to do or create. Sixteenth century Protestant theologian, Peter Martyr Vermigli speaks to this classification saying:
Philosophy is divided into active and contemplative… they differ inasmuch as contemplation only observes, while action does what is known. Therefore they are distinguished as to their ends: theory reposes in the very contemplation of things since it cannot create them. Likewise, practice observes, but only inasmuch as it may express what it knows in action.[3]
Dividing thought between that which passively contemplates and that which seeks action is important. Thought may only lead directly to action when there is an act to be performed. Recognizing this, it may be admitted that contemplation of God and His perfections, the wonders of creation, or the nobility of truth is not within the realm of practical thought. A man does not reflect upon God in order that he may create God; this is impossible. Man’s knowing God must reside in the realm of the contemplative, for it cannot serve as a final cause.
Vermigli continues:
Clearly, we see two operations in man, for he thinks, then acts. Just as God not only understands Himself and is happy and perfect in Himself, but also creates by His providence and rules what He has created, so man’s happiness is considered twofold. The one we may call active… The other, far more perfect and admirable, is contemplation… Thus it is obvious that man may approach to a small degree the likeness of God, if this is accomplished through this double felicity… Nor, as some think, is the distinction between practice and speculation the same as that between the operations of our will and intellect, respectively. This is not admissible, since the sciences are distinguished through objects. If anyone examines the matter more diligently, he will see that it must be taken in regard to the objects of understanding. For they have God and nature as a cause, and so would pertain to the speculative genus, since we cannot create them by our own will. Those other things of which we are the cause, which we are able to will and to choose, belong to the practical faculty.[4]
This paragraph accurately summarizes why the speculative philosophy is in decline. Exact attention must be given to the distinctions made. Practical and speculative thought are not actions which man performs with different faculties or organs; they both occur in the mind. The difference is that speculative thought contemplates that which man cannot create (God, truth, etc.) while practical thought pertains to that which man may produce.[5] In the materialistic and rationalistic excesses of our own day, contemplative thought is held to be useless for man’s true end: production and consumption of worldly goods.
God is at perfect rest (lacking no good) in contemplating Himself and the very center of God’s blessedness is self-contemplation. For man to forsake the contemplative ability with which he has been endowed is to deny in himself that which most clearly reflects the blessedness of God. When Paul exhorts us to think upon whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, he is encouraging us in a contemplative use of the mind.[6]
In the Scriptural teaching the truth is held to be the highest end of the mental faculties and it is considered valuable in and of itself. When Christ teaches I am the way, the truth, and the life, He is not saying “love Me so that your sins may be forgiven,” or “follow Me that you may find peace”. There is no bait attached. The expectation is that by revealing Himself as the thing most sought for, He should be desired for what He is, not what He may do for those who adhere to Him.
It is on this ground that contemporary theology needs to speak plainly. If theological study is pursued exclusively because it is believed that the Bible contains the solution to man’s ills, then theology is being subverted. Theology is not a means, but an end. One does not seek out the magnificence and excellence of God so that insights into the problems of democracy may be obtained. Theology has practical consequences, but it is not a practical science. To subordinate the pursuit of truth to practical ends in theological study is an act of subversion.
Truth is the highest attainment of man’s mental faculties. The contents of divine revelation; e.g. God’s attributes, the plan of salvation, and the promises regarding the consummation of the work of grace, etc. is truth in its most pure form. Man does not create these things, instead he receives them in a spirit of faith and understanding. This is a speculative act, not a practical one. The endless efforts to make theology “relevant” by relating it back to supposedly practical concerns is an admission that truth is fallen in the streets and is not considered worthwhile in and of itself.
To seek out the truth, to contemplate it, to revel in and adore it; these are the highest uses of man’s mental faculties. Glorifying our Creator and Redeemer should not be subordinated to worldly concerns. God made man’s mind to seek out and contemplate truth. This is the mind’s highest calling and to leave it neglected is to allow the intellect to fall into disarray. By relegating all intellectual endeavor to the realm of the practical, we encourage man in the path of utilitarianism. Truth is not forged and it is not harnessed. Truth is discovered and it is respected. Rationalistic man is loath to admit that anything beyond his employment or direct creation is of any use. For him truth has no inherent worth. There is only the pursuit of material ends. Creation does not exist to be understood but instead manipulated. The disharmony of soul which this attitude produces can be seen all around us.
Concerning the inherent value of truth James Thornwell has written, saying:
It is, indeed, as the ancients well expressed it, the food of the soul – pabulum animi. There is a natural congruity betwixt it and the structure of the mind. The one corresponds to the other as light to the eye and sounds to the ear. The existence of such a desire as curiosity is a clear intimation that man was formed for intelligence as well as for action; and the adjustment of his faculties to the objects by which he is surrounded is a command from God to exercise them according to the laws which He has defined their operation in the acquisition of knowledge. …
It deserves further to be remarked that it is the prerogative of truth alone to invigorate the mind. The distinctions of sophistry and error may impart acuteness, quicken sagacity, and stimulate readiness, but what is gained in sharpness is lost in expansion and solidity. The minuteness of vision which falls to the lot of whole tribes of insects is suited only to a narrow sphere and to diminutive objects. The eye, which can detect the latent animalcules which teem in the air, the water, and the soil, is incompetent to embrace in its range the glories of heaven or the beauties of earth. The dexterity and readiness which defenses of falsehood are suited to produce is not a free, generous, healthful activity, but a diseased condition of the system analogous to that induced by fever or poisonous and stimulating potions. But truth is a food which the soul digests; it strengthens and consolidates the mind, and is in every view worthy of the high encomiums which the ancient sages were accustomed to lavish upon the pursuits of their favorite philosophy as the wealth of reason, the culture and medicine of the soul, the choicest gift of heaven.[7]
This minuteness of vision which Thornwell attributes to insects has now become customary of man as well. Standing as masters of creation, we stare only at the ground. Despising its true food, the soul withers. The glories of heaven and the beauties of earth go unnoticed or worse, despised. Nowhere is this more on display than in that great mass of theological writing which styles itself as “practical.”
In this hour man is not in need of another half-baked work of sociology masquerading as “theology” which will change nothing, and reading your favorite economic ideology backwards into the Bible is no better. What is needed is a strengthening and consolidating of man’s mind unto true religion. This will only come about via ardent pursuit of the truth. Of all the sciences, theology deals with truth in its most pure form. It is time that it reclaimed its title as queen of the sciences. It must do this unflinchingly; not disguising itself as offering worldly benefits to its disciples. The truth is worthy to be sought by its own merit. Our God is the Rock, His work is perfect: for all His ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He.[8]
The author is a research associate with the Pactum Institute.
[1] Augustine: Confessios (New York, NY; Barnes and Noble Books: 2007) p. 3
[2] “The facts of revelation are its doctrines or mysteries, and these reduced to method, according to their dependencies and connections, constitute theology.” ~~ James H Thornwell
James H. Thornwell: Collected Writings (Murrayfield Road, Edinburgh; The Banner of Truth Trust: 1986) vol. III p. 200
[3] Peter Martyr Vermigli: The Peter Marty Library, Volume 9 (Kirksville, Missouri; Truman State University Press, 2006) p. 8
[4] ibid
[5] The following distinctions are too elaborate for a work of this small scope, therefore they are included as a footnote to enable further study:
“Some knowledge is speculative only; some is practical only; and some is partly speculative and partly practical. In proof whereof it must be observed that knowledge can be called speculative in three ways: first, on the part of the things known, which are not operable by the knower; such is the knowledge of man about natural or divine things. Secondly, as regards the manner of knowing – as, for instance, if a builder consider a house by defining and dividing, and considering what belongs to it in general: for this is to consider operable things in a speculative manner, and not as practically operable; for operable means the application of form to matter, and not the resolution of the composite into its universal formal principles. Thirdly, as regards the end; for the practical intellect differs in its end from the speculative, as the Philosopher says (De Anima iii). For the practical intellect is ordered to the end of the operation; whereas the end of the speculative intellect is the consideration of truth. Hence if a builder should consider how a house can be made, not ordering this to the end of operation, but only to know (how to do it), this would be only a speculative consideration as regards the end, although it concerns an operable thing. Therefore knowledge which is speculative by reason of the thing itself known, is merely speculative. But that which is speculative either in its mode or as to its end is partly speculative and partly practical: and when it is ordained to an operative end it is simply practical. ~~ Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica Pt. 1, Q. 14, Art. 16
[6] Philippians 4:8
[7] James H. Thornwell: Collected Writings (Murrayfield Road, Edinburgh; The Banner of Truth Trust: 1986) vol. II pp. 479-481
[8] Deuteronomy 32:4