The question of method in theology is one with broader implications than the scope of its concrete substance implies. For while we speak of it as a question of “how” in one’s doing of theology, the answers penetrate to the heart of the practice itself. In looking at the breadth of theological method in the world across time and space, inclusive to the questions of the use of all things such as Scripture, reason, philosophy, platonic forms, aristotelean categorization, demythologization, various forms of criticism (historical, form, textual, etc), the apocalyptic change of ages, proclamation, dogmatization, and repristination of traditional consensuses – what one sees is that the actual question at hand in theological methodology is not how theology is to be done but what theology itself is.
While referring to theology as “God-talk” or talking about God has become a sort of universal spirit of the age, the history of theological method tells us that this is a new idea. To go back to some earlier thinkers such as St. Augustine, theology is seen by some as a task of teaching or learning along the quest for knowledge. This being sought to gain thereby a sort of reward of strength within the self. For Aquinas It was a sort of prayer, or, beholding of God. For Anselm it was faith seeking understanding. For some reformers theology was both proclamation of scripture as well as weapon against false teachers. Or, if you will, an application of Law and Gospel.
Throughout that whole movement from early chruch, through medieval, and up to reformation era the question of reason’s place in theology was battled upon fervently. This boiled over in the so-called enlightenment period with those who found that reason was ultimately self defeating. They came a place of feeling that all they could know with certainty by reason was that they could know nothing with certainty by reason (at least in matters of Theology). This threw into question whether theology was or was not a science. For of course, science was a rational exercise whereby one would hypothesize and test on observable and rational grounds. This shifted in their minds what theology was. For so long it had been held up as a science and indeed, the Queen of the sciences. But for those after this cataclysmic shift it became something else. Such as an “art” or, if you will, a subjective hope. At best a wish. For those who were determined to keep it a science, they de-theologized it. Keeping it scientific by abandoning its theologicality. And so theology re-entered the university as a form of history, sociology, anthropology, or psychology. But theology proper was banished to the church and the seminary. And theology left the popular mind of the citizen. At this point ehat use the scriptures had and, so also, what they were came into question. Then so also did tbe ground and foundation of theology. if theology is an art then there cannot be a true or false form of it. If it is an art then the scriptures become some kind of a brush for the theologian to paint with. The Bible no longer the source but, the means for the mind of the theologian to hit the canvas. For theology was now “free” to be created by man. A God made in the image of man. With theology as history, the Bible became the myth of a dying or dead culture of the ancients. Jesus, a proposed historical figured mythologized and obscured by the glorious fog of legend and pious tradition. With theology as psychology the absolution became acceptance. Forgiveness toleration. With theology as sociology Christ became political martyr, and non violent victim. All this becuase we talked about God in our own words, with our own minds, by our own reason, strength, and understanding.
All of these questions, such as how to do theology, what place scripture, and reason, and church tradition have, whether it is science or art, history or psychology or some other thing all related to, impacted, and were impacted by this dual question of what theology was and how it was to be done
Thus when we ask this question of how to do theology, what is at issue is fundamentally the question of what it is?
I will pose here as answer to this question of what theology and how it is to be done in this way. Firstly, what theology is. Theology is God’s Word and Action. Full stop. To use the popular turn of phrase, it IS God talk. It’s just not we who do the talking. The talk, whether we are silent or not, is His Word spoken to us. Theology is always linguistic, language is just as much heard as it spoken. This here is key. To hear or read theology as by literary or aural reception is to engage in and in fact to do theology. For theology in a sense always is God talk, but sometimes He alone is speaking. When we do speak or write, it remains the case that He is speaking and we are receiving, though, when we do it correctly, we copy the words and sounds He makes. This can be seen most perfectly in the Liturgy, in which His Word is heard through the voice of Christians, in absolution, scripture reading, baptism, the Altar, and even, when done properly, in the sermon. This is a higher form of theology than Barth’s 14-volume dogmatics. And yet Barth’s dogmatics remains theology. This is of course, because whether that Word is liturgically acted out or remains on the page, it is theology insofar as it is God’s Word.
And yet here is another key, in that it is God’s talk and not ours, we ought not speak our own words when we set out to theologize. For as my professor often asks the question, “How dare we sinful creatures speak of God?” Well, we ought not. In fact, we cannot. For outside of His revelation, He is hidden, unknown, unseen, unheard, and unobserved. Whatever can be known of Him is not to be known by reason or sight or bodily sense, but only by the Word. And yet, as that Word has commanded us to speak it back into the world at large, how dare we NOT speak that Word about God? Again, this is key. To synthesize – we ought not speak of God from His hiddenness, which is to colour in the shadows of His hiddenness with the dumb imaginings of our corrupt hearts, and sculpt him into our own image, whether that be for our presumed good, for it always ends in our actual ill.
Theology is therefore neither science nor art. For we neither construct it, nor “do” it, nor should we be throwing out hypotheses or to test it. We should not shape or form it according to taste or feeling. Theology is also therefore not a question. To pose theology as a question, whether that be of why or what or how assumes that the answer was not revealed. As earlier, what is not revealed cannot be known, nor should it be pried into as though we could see the unrevealed by reason. All we see there is ourselves staring back at us.
Rather, theology is a revelation that we hear, and then bear witness to as we speak it back to the world, being drawn into God’s own speaking of it as the mouth of His body, the church
As to what that revelation is, we can draw in all of the best aspects of the above competing theories. It does relate to the apocalyptic change of the age, the overturning of death and darkness as they give way to life and to light. It is the liberation from bandage and the exaltation of the oppressed. It is a speech act made real through the creative Word that is the Christ spoken by the Father through His Holy Breath.
But in framing these ideas, we want to be careful to root them in the objective reality they point toward. For theology, apart from being revealed by God, is revealed as mystery unveiled and as the unknown made known.
For it is not merely such that God speaks AS, in His revelation, in some imaginary way, calling things that which they aren’t. Nor even that He speaks things AS THEY ARE, pointing out what already is. Rather, God speaks things AND THEN THEY ARE. For God did not say let it be as if there was light. Nor did He say there is light because there was light. But he said let there be light and there was, because He said so. He spoke reality into existence and creation. This is the true creative art of theology, but it is not ours to do except in that we are drawn into this song of God’s creation, as He uses us as instruments in His Theanthropic symphony.
We may characterize true theology, then, as passive. First in reception, and then in repetition. The Word heard and the Word repeated. Beyond that, shut up, be still, and know that the Lord is God indeed. That is theology
O Lord, open thou our Lips, and our mouths will pour forth thy praise.
