The Nature and Task of Systematic Theology
The term Systematic Theology dates from the early eighteenth century. Systematic Theology, though, builds on a tradition, often called Dogmatics, that began in the third century CE. Systematic theologians set out to identify and discuss the complete scope of Christian teachings and doctrines, which they treat as propositions to be defended. The subject matter of Systematic Theology remains constant, since this is identified with faith itself. Traditionally represented by the Scriptures and Creeds, to which faith gives authority, these sources remain the same. On the other hand, social and intellectual contexts change, so fresh effort to explain faith is constantly required. On the negative side, Systematic Theology risks making the infinite finite, that is, reducing the divine to a set of human ideas, limiting its mystery, the ability to confound and challenge. On the positive side, Systematic Theology can be dynamic and creative in its attempts to make credible and valid statements about God and His relationship with the world, which is its task. By nature, Systematic Theology begins and ends with faith, which it aims to serve and strengthen. By nature, it seeks to help the faithful understand faith it is faith seeking understanding. Its nature is grounded in faith its task is to serve faith in dialogue with cultural contexts and varying philosophical modes. At times, it confused faith with expressions of faith. Recent trends mitigate this.
Systematic Theology and the Early Church
Berkhof, a reformed theologian and Francis Schssler Fiorenza, a Catholic, writing about the nature and task of Systematic Theology, trace the origin of the discipline to the third century. Berkhof says that for the first two centuries, there was no attempt to present the whole body of doctrinal truth, gathered from the Word of God, in a systematic way. It was Origen (d. 254) and Augustine (d. 430) who pioneered Systematic Theology, an attempt to develop a systematic theory of religious knowledge that related faith to the philosophical knowledge and disciplines of late antiquity. Fiorenza says that the nature and method of theology vary but several constants are identifiable, namely that Scripture is a primary element followed by the community. On the one hand, Systematic Theology sees itself as an academic discipline that shares all the scholarly goals of other disciplines, namely historical exactitude, conceptual rigor, systematic consistency, and interpretive clarity. On the other hand, its relationship with faith makes it more, like a raft bobbing upon the waves of the sea than a pyramid based on solid ground.
Origins work did not survive intact. However, it established some basic principles of what became Systematic Theology. Origen took it as axiomatic that the Scripture and Creeds are true, so attempts to explain faith seeks to present this truth. Dogmas set out in the Creeds came to be regarded as revealed, defined by an infallible authority. That authority, in theory, was God. In practice, it was the Church. Church tradition, said Origen, contained the canon of faith. This identifies the nature of theology, which is ultimately concerned with the divine-human relationship. Faith is in God but it is also from God. The theologians responsibility, according to Origen, is to explicate faiths inner rationale and implications.
Origen and Augustine did this in dialogue with Greek philosophy, which represented the intellectual climate in which Christians lived. They pioneered a long tradition of relating Systematic Theology to the philosophical categories and literature of the time. Beginning with a first principle, for example, was a philosophical convention. A first principle cannot be deduced from any other assertion or proposition. Christians wanted to make sense of their faith in contemporary modes. They also wanted to explain this to non-Christians in language they could understand, responding to the questions they asked. From the start, there was a link between the task of Systematic Theology, proclamation and apology. Systematic Theology, says Forde, is for proclamation When properly done, it fosters, advocates and drives to proclamation. Systematic Theology mediates between past and present, church and the world. Origin took God as his first principle, arguing that all comes from the divine unity and returns to this unity. This established a tradition of god as the opening subject matter, usually discussed under Trinity, with sub-headings such as Father, Son and Spirit. The son includes the incarnation, Jesus death, resurrection and reign. Augustine did not produce a complete Systematic Theology but made a major contribution to the disciplines development in his ENCHIRIDION (Handbook). Explaining the Creed, this work became almost as authoritative in the Church as the creed itself.
Aquinas Classical Systematic Theology
Aquinas (d. 1274) left his Summa Theologica incomplete. However, it set out to summarize the churchs teaching. It began and ended with God, moving through creation, human existence, the church and sacraments, then returning to God. Aquinas distinguished the task of theology from philosophy theology is always concerned with things in relation to God, philosophy is concerned with things in their own natures. However, like his predecessors, he wanted to establish that faith was rational and credible, so responded to questions posed by philosophy. The content is set out as propositions those of Christian doctrine, followed by a discussion of objections. Aquinas was significantly influenced by Aristotle. Throughout, Aquinas is in dialogue with context. His famous five arguments for the existence of God are expressed in philosophical language, logically proceeding from one premise to the next.
Aquinas, like his predecessors, began with the premises that God exists, that the Dogmas of the Church are true. Therefore, Gods existence and doctrinal truth can be defended. He nonetheless hoped that those who did not share his presuppositions would accept faith was not irrational, even if it did not rest on proofs. Doctrines were true because they came from God (revelation). They do not derive validity from philosophy yet neither are they unreasonable, irrational or contrary to what philosophy can deduce. Faith and reason share a common source. Aquinas is generally credited with successfully synthesizing faith and reason. Of course, by this time, Europe was Christian and the Church was the premier institution, so Aquinas could produce a sophisticated summary of all that the Church believed, representing the building blocks of a coherent world view. Aquinas was interested in persuading non-Christians, such as Jews and Muslims. He was more concerned, though, with constructing a coherent system through which Christians could view the world. This became known as scholasticism, a school of thought that aimed to sum up all knowledge, answering all conceivable questions of any real importance. This would cause clashes between the Church and new scientific ideas that challenged how the world, its physics and laws, were understood. A Cathedral of Ideas would match the high cathedrals where worship was offered. One commentator suggests that Aquinas was too anxious to explain, to set everything in stone, thus restricting Gods right to contradict himself. He lost sight of the ineffable, mysterious aspect of faith. The products of faith took priority over faith.
Post-Reformation, Post-Enlightenment Systematic Theology.
Protestants turned to Systematic Theology, presenting their own interpretation of the Bible and Creeds. Commonly used from the early eighteenth century, the term may date from Johannes Andreas Quenstedt (d. 1688), according to Pannenburg. One difference in theory between Catholic and Protestant theologians is that the former locate the authority of tradition within the Church, seeing this as infallible, the latter do not regard tradition as infallible. They ascribe traditions a large measure of permanence and stability but stress their biblical origin and authority rather than that of the Church. Early protestant Systematic Theology was anxious to give priority to personal conversion, piety and the primacy of scripture, articulating the view of Church as a voluntary community of believers, all of whom are priests. Yet Protestant works of Systematic Theology still discussed traditional topics, such as Father, Son, Spirit, the Person and Work of Christ, Salvation and Eschatology, the sacraments. What influenced the development of a new focus was the end of the comfortable assumption that theology could control learning across all fields, as the Queen of Science. Initially, just as for Aquinas the truth of the articles of faith was a presupposition so for early Lutherans the fact that a statement of faith has a biblical basis adequately ensured its truth, which did not need to be established. Increasingly, however, Enlightenment thought challenged theology as the arbiter of all knowledge. By questioning the divine origin of bible and tradition, their role as sure foundations was suspect. Initially, says Panneburg, neither Catholics nor Protestants changed how they pursued Systematic Theology, continuing to privilege tradition and bible.
Systematic Theology assumes conversation between Church and world. It also assumes consistency the truth it presents today is the same as yesterday. It is concerned with the faith of our fathers, with what is ancient but also ever new. Truth, if true does not change. Literature on Systematic Theology stresses that consistency is vital, unifying Christian thought. Nonetheless, change is possible. Earlier understandings can be seen as valid for the context in which they developed. New information sheds different light, modifying ideas or how language is used. In response to contemporary circumstance, Catholics have re-discovered the mystery that doctrines express and have re-visited the meaning of language. Protestants have stressed the inner life of faith as standing in continuity with the first Christians, while outward expressions of that faith may change. F. D. E Schleiermacher (d. 1834) pioneered a switch from regarding the subject of theology as objective to seeing this as subjective, a result of the prior experience of faith. Traditional Systematic Theology assumed faith as the starting point but focuses on faiths product, the Creeds, affording authority and infallibility to them.
Schleiermacher placed God-consciousness, feeling, dependency on God, at the center. This would allow more recent thinkers, such as Paul Tillich, to place existence and being at the center of his work, perhaps asking what is Man before who is God Anthropology displaces philosophy in providing language and concepts and an intellectual framework. Pannenburg chose to rethink the concept of revelation, which he does not see a complete but gradual, thus the complete content can not be know until history itself ends. This allows for more provisional, tentative, exploratory statements than the categorical declarations of earlier thinkers.
Contemporary Catholic and Protestant Trends
A contemporary systematic theologian asks
How can the Christian faith, first experienced and symbolically articulated in an ancient culture now long out-of-date, speak meaningfully to human existence today as we experience it aimed at a worldview dominated by natural science, secular self-understanding and the worldwide cry for freedom
In a world where ideas about gender, authority and personal autonomy differ radically from the third century, how can Systematic Theology speak meaningfully Peters approach is to re-visit the intent of Christian beliefs, doctrines and formulations, first understanding their origin, then exploring possible alternatives that address contemporary concerns. For example, on gender, recognizing that many are alienated by the dominance of male imagery, he shows that use of Father derived from Jesus practice of calling God Abba. This intended to convey Gods intimacy, not to designate Gods gender. All language used to describe God is language, not that to which it refers, opening up the possibility of using other language instead. This is also consistent with another new emphasis, on God as always pro-freedom. That which oppresses, including language, is to be questioned. Reading the Bible through a pro-liberation lens challenges the way in which the Church has actually oppressed people over the centuries, demanding doctrine conformity, denying women a role, for example. By restoring priority to experience, the question is what was the experience of God that led to traditional articulations
Catholic thinking has tended to shift in a similar direction, although it remains more tied to traditional formulations, given the concept of infallibility and the role played by the authority of the church. However, since Vatican II, it has been more comfortable with recognizing the human element in theology, instead of seeing everything the Church has said and done as divine. This leaves room for mystery and metaphor, even for error, for sometimes admitting that the Church was not always right.
Conclusion
Systematic Theology shows consistency in terms of scope and task, development in emphasis, language and concepts. Suggesting that tradition often replaced faith as the starting point, a noticeably development has been a return to faith as the subject of reflection. Even if Scripture and Creeds are wholly divine (revealed), how we interpret these is human and fallible.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment