The third of my ten-part series on a basic systematic theology deriving from the Nicene Creed.

------------------------------------

Prelude

All the churches, all Christians, are called to do theology and to be theologians.
-- Joe Jones

Before getting into the heart of the matter of faith by examining the Creed, we must examine two issues: that of the purpose and context of theology (without which, none of this much matters) and that of sources, from which this examination and formulation of faith derives.

What is systematic theology?

It is inquiry yoked to prayer.
-- Daniel Migliore

Answering this question has many components, most directly related to the context in which theology takes place, and the overall task of theology. Context depends upon definition, various terms which need to be defined before any argument or system can be built up. The words used and the constructions used must make sense. While thoughts and beliefs may be the domain of the individual, the language in which it is expressed is not a solitary exercise, and ‘...making sense is a communal activity as well as an individual activity.’ (Jones I, p. 8) But even the way an individual thinks is governed by the upbringing and education in community in which that individual was raised.

Likewise, the questions that are being addressed must make sense in context. Chasing after irrelevant or inappropriate questions may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but does not fit the task of systematic theology. Question of the nature of God, the nature of divine revelation, salvation, human relationships to the divine and hence toward each other--these are not easy questions. Sometimes they are not only difficult intellectually but have uncomfortable aspects. However, ‘...the church must take seriously the questions put to it by the many faces and forms of the world in which it exists.’ (Jones I, p. 15)

Systematic theology, to be worthwhile, must exist in a particular context. Systematic theology is that theology ‘...that is appropriate to the church and which presupposes and serves the church.’ (Jones I, p. 11) The church provides the framework for asking question, and provides guidance for testing the answers. The church is the appropriate venue for the community for the discussion and critical analysis of theological questions, lest the community fall into intellectual disarray with opposing viewpoints, or theological apathy due to the fact that the church, perhaps the natural organisation for theology, is likewise ignoring the duty of theology.

However, there must be the recognition that many of the questions can in fact never be fully answered. Jones describes this type of question as being ineradicable, and what some in my tradition refer to as holy mysteries. ‘...God is always greater than our ideas of God...’ (Migliore, p. 3). The task of theology can be a never-ending task for each generation; the task is then multiplied by the succession of generations and by cross-cultural experiences to grow quite unwieldy.

The context of the questions may change with different cultures and different generations--while the subject (God, truth, etc.) may by some systematic theologies be held to be unchanging, human beings, and hence the way human beings relate to the divine and each other, are constantly in flux. Thus, ‘theology not only ask questions but must be self-conscious about the way it does so.’ (Migliore, p. 14) Questions appropriate for one generation may be less appropriate, or indeed inappropriate for another. Questions one culture posits may have no relevance to another. Those doing theology must ask why they are asking the particular questions they are asking, and the way in which they are asking them, and examine critically in what ways these choices affect the answers generated by the theological inquiry.

Theology is one of the primary tasks of the church, ‘part of the esse, the essence of the church’ and insofar as the church ignores theology, it ceases to be the church. (Jones I, p. 17) Therefore, one of the tasks of theology is to provide that essence to the church. ‘...Systematic theology is a special task of the church and that the church is therefore the proper context for pursuing this task.’ (Jones I, p. 1)

Theology is not simply an intellectual exercise. It can be a practice-- an inquiry into one’s faith, and thus can be a very spiritual endeavour. To this end, it can be transforming, and thus true to the task of the church: ‘Christian discourse is designed to transform human life by changing persons to fit the distinctive concepts, beliefs and practices of faith...’ (Jones I, p. 6) There are, however, many different kinds of Christian discourse, many of which may be transforming. Hymns, liturgical prayer, discussion and lectures on topics of historical aspects--each of these may qualify as Christian discourse.

Systematic theology has a particular role to pay, however, in the life and witness of the church, and thus in my own belief structure. It aims as the fullness of understanding, a more complete and more satisfying way of examining the faith one holds. ‘...The effort of theology to be "systematic" is to be affirmed insofar as its concern is for the wholeness of faith as opposed to partial and one-sided understandings.’ (Migliore, p. 11) Systematic theology guards against a patchwork of convenient explanations and unexamined statements of belief or dogma. It strives to build a framework strong enough to support the faith of the church; supple enough to be refashioned as contexts change and new challenges arise, but sturdy enough to withstand the torrents of disbelief and erroneous conjecture.

Christian theology is a confessional theology, ‘rooted in faith’s communal response to the self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ.’ (Jones I, p. 38) This confessional theology is often expressed in ways that are un-reasonable, and in fact most exposure people have to Christianity, past and present, consists of this kind of faith statement. ‘These primary expressions of faith do not attempt to give a reasoned account of the truth claims that they make.’ (Migliore, p. 19) Faith happens in different spheres of the soul, in the emotions, in the mind, in our actions and interactions. The discernment of the truth occurs for the Christian in relation to the self-revelation of God through Jesus Christ.

In Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen one, then, we have a criterion for distinguishing in the concrete history of religion between what is a human misunderstanding of the transcendental experience of God, and what is the legitimate interpretation of this experience. (Rahner I, p. 134)

By relation to the revelation of Christ, Christians can test their understanding of the lives they lead. ‘The deepest form of truth in Christian discourse and practices is a life in intentional conformity to the triune life of God.’ (Jones I, p. 55)

This is not to say that the revelation of Jesus Christ is the only revelation of God, the only self-revelation of God, or the only self-revelation of God that matters. However, there are problems with ideas of universal or natural revelation, such as the inadequacy of definition of God, and that, as Rahner states, this kind of reliance on natural revelation defines ‘the presence of God as question, not as answer,’ and thus does little in and of itself to satisfy the search for truth or serve as a basis of faith. (Rahner I, p. 139)

Obviously, definitionally the particular revelation upon which Christianity rests must be ‘this confession, which is the normative, foundation pivot point of Christian theology, is that God is definitively self-revealed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ (Jones I, p. 39) It is in Jesus Christ that ‘God’s communication to us in grace and at the same time its categorical self-interpretation in the corporeal, tangible, and social dimension have reached their climax, have become revelation in an absolute sense.’ (Rahner I, p. 143) This particular revelation ‘captures the allegiance of the heart, brings new vision to human imagination, and provides new direction to human reason.’ (Migliore, p. 21) It does not become a narrow focus, a set of blinders placed beside our eyes to prevent our seeing about us, but rather a framework and guide to discern all things in the world, and thus to have transformative power.

Revelation continues through the work of the Holy Spirit in the discernment and faithful explorations of Christians today. Would God be God if reduced to a static dictum? In a world that is constantly changing, would an unchanging God be relevant? Can an unchanging God care about humanity? There are those who attempt to identify scripture with revelation, and thus assume that with the closure of the canon, all revelation stops. However, ‘God does not cease self-communicating with the close of the New Testament canon.’ (Jones I, p. 50) ‘Scripture witnesses to revelation but is not identical with it.’ (Migliore, p. 35) All scripture was initially received by, continually refined and passed on by, and to the present interpreted by, fallible human beings, both individual and corporate.

That society changes and the issues of importance change as well requires new revelation to enable God’s self-communication to continue to be recognised.

The history of the transcendental revelation of God will necessarily show itself again and again to be a history which is taking place in an irreversible direction toward a highest and comprehensive self-interpretation of humankind. (Rahner I, p. 131)

Christians must come to terms with the fact of on-going revelation. ‘Even today the church can be reminded by the existence of Jewish people that God’s presence is always a free and inscrutable presence which is not under the control of the church.’ (Jones I, p. 41) Recognition of the fact of ongoing revelation keeps faith vital and alive; the recognition of any particular instance of revelation, however, is problematic. Christianity from the earliest time has emphasised a communal approach to discernment, and this should be a primary element in testing revelatory claims. However, communal approaches are themselves liable to the worse aspects of institutional behaviours, so ‘a capacity for criticism, including self-criticism, is essential to the Christian experience of revelation.’ (Migliore, p. 28) The community must seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit, listening both to priestly and prophetic voices, examining in light of scripture, tradition and reason in testing the truth claims of ongoing revelatory events.

My next article will deal with sources of theology.


References for this section:

Book of Common Prayer. 1979. Seabury Press: New York.

Jones, Joe. Manuscript for A Grammar of Christian Faith, Volumes I & II. 1999-2000. Rowman and Littlefield, 2002.

Migliore, Daniel L. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. 1991. Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Rahner, Karl. The Trinity. 1997. Crossroad Publishing: New York.

Rahner, Karl. Edited by Geffrey B. Kelly. Karl Rahner. 1992. Augsburg Fortress Press: Minneapolis, Minnesota.