Chapter 3: Theology as Habit of the Mind and Divine Truth

The closest union between the intellect and truth — Theology denotes both a habit of the mind and truth itself — God's knowledge of us cannot be called archetypal — Theology, as doctrine, is from God alone and immediately — In what sense the word of God is our theology — The distributions of theologians: angels, men — Men either theanthropic or ectypal — Mere men either wayfarers or possessors — The theology of the latter to be investigated

I. Having set aside those things which, though among some writers they fill both pages in the inquiry into the nature of theology, in truth cast an impediment before those sincerely seeking the truth, let us look directly at the matter itself in general — that is, its own nature — to which we devote this labor. Now since between any known thing and that faculty and power of our mind by which we apprehend it — namely, the intellect itself considered in its relation to the thing — there is, by virtue of the intervening conformity of truth, a close union and bond, so that each communicates its own name to the other in turn, and thus the properties proper to one are often attributed to the other: for a thing or doctrine is often called certain, from that certainty which is a property of the mind; and our apprehension is called true, from the truth of the thing we apprehend. Hence arises no small confusion in definitions, since it can hardly be perceived whether it is the doctrine, or the faculty of the mind (by whose own proper light we apprehend the doctrine itself and its proper end), that is being defined. Since, therefore, it is acknowledged that by theology is denoted both the doctrine concerning God, the worship and obedience due to Him, and the power and faculty of our mind by which we perceive it — that is, the habit conformed to it — to avoid confusion arising from equivocation, these must be treated distinctly.

II. It belongs to the infinite self-sufficiency of God that He alone knows Himself perfectly: Ps. 147:5 — "His understanding has no number." Therefore that knowledge by which God most perfectly knows Himself and all His attributes, since it is infinite and necessary, belongs to none other than God Himself, who is infinitely knowing and wise. This knowledge, therefore, of the primal truth perfectly comprehending and loving itself, is called archetypal theology by some, though improperly. Indeed, I greatly doubt whether they themselves understand what they would mean by archetypal theology. For our knowledge of God is not the express image of that infinite divine knowledge (which is proper to the Son alone as a partaker of the divine nature, Hebrews 1:3), so that it could be called ectypal in relation to it; nor can we know anything of God by its power or virtue, except with the free counsel of the divine will intervening. Our mirror is not God Himself immediately, but His word — that is, the gospel — in which, with unveiled face, we behold the glory of the Lord through Christ (2 Corinthians 3:18). God has in His own mind an eternal idea, or concept, of that truth which He wills to be known by us. And upon this all our theology depends — not immediately, to be sure, but upon that act of the divine will by which it pleased Him to reveal that truth to us: "For no one has ever seen God; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him" (John 1:18). The revelation of the divine mind and will, that is, the word of God, is therefore the doctrine of which we speak, to which all the concepts of our mind concerning God, His worship, and the obedience due to Him ought to be conformed. And here again theology differs greatly from every science that is a shoot of human wisdom. For that system of principles and conclusions by which any science is transmitted is not the norm of the mind's concepts, or of the acts of the intellect, regarding the proper object of that science; but since it comes after them and is their effect, it must be regulated by them. Thus the most eminent philosopher: "The sciences that are in the rational soul, which pertain to sensible things — if indeed the knowledge of these things is to be called science by us, since it would be more fitting to call them opinions — these, I say, since they are posterior to things, are images of those things" (Plotinus, Enneads V, book ix.). But the doctrine of which we speak precedes every concept of our mind regarding its own peculiar and proper object, and is the infallible, immutable rule and norm of all our knowledge and cognition (Ps. 19).

III. Theology, therefore, is the very divine truth as it is revealed by God — namely, the word, the doctrine, or the light that is self-ordained and self-authenticating. No one can think or speak worthily of God and divine things except through God. No one rightly knows God except from His own exposition through the Son; nor does He will to be worshiped except in the manner He Himself has prescribed. All our obedience also depends purely on His will. And all theology is concerned with God and His worship, and the obedience due to Him. Therefore that doctrine can come from none other than God Himself. Since theology is the principle and norm of all divine worship, faith, and obedience, it is accordingly necessary that it also be of heavenly origin and infallible certainty — from heaven, not from men (Matthew 21:25). For divine faith is willing to rest upon no principle that is not in every way self-sufficient and without human lordship. Moreover, the worship of God is so called no less from the divine command than from the divine object. Lest, therefore, the whole human race should perpetually waver in all its obedience and fall into difficulties, God willed that the doctrine which is the norm of all His worship and of our obedience should come from Himself. In this sense, therefore, theology is the doctrine of God concerning Himself, His works, His will and worship, and our obedience in every state, together with the reward and the punishment of the disobedient, revealed and declared to the glory of His name — that is, the very word of God itself. Now since the word of God is either unwritten or written in a record, and the latter again is either unwritten or written, we shall next set forth in order how each of these stands in this matter. But what is to be thought of the so-called theological theses, catechisms, confessions, commonplaces, and miscellaneous collections of credible propositions of this kind, and in what esteem they are to be held — in the learning or even the teaching of which many suppose (unless I am mistaken) that theology consists — will be seen below.

After, therefore (to add this here in its proper place), all the word of God whatever has been committed to writing, that Scripture is so our theology that we ascribe authority to the whole of it, to every part of it, and to each individual truth contained in it — not because one proposition is established from another by adducing evident reasons, or because the conclusions to which we assent are rightly derived from whatever principles, but because we embrace each individual truth or truth-proposition, considered separately, with certain faith, on account of its immediate divine revelation, upon which all theology rests. But that habit which the scholastics call discursive — by which from propositions, of which one belongs to Scripture and is therefore divinely revealed, and the other is illuminated by its own natural evidence, we draw conclusions (concerning whose nature, whether they are, as they say, "de fide" or not, sharp debates are waged) — insofar as it is something else (if it be something else), is foreign to our purposes, distinct from the gift of interpreting the Scriptures.

This having been premised, therefore — namely, that theology considered objectively, as they say, and in the abstract, is the pure and unmixed word of God, the light of the rational creature's mind, which is also called by that name — it remains to be carefully weighed further. But so that what we are aiming at may be reached more easily, some distribution of the subjects capable of receiving this light must first be premised, and then the relation of that light to the doctrine of which we are speaking, and the union with it, must be examined. Now first, with respect to the subject (as they say), theology can generally be divided into that which belongs to angels and that which belongs to men. For it is incumbent upon both angels and men — because they are endowed with intellectual light — to know God and to obey Him freely; and their ultimate end consists in the enjoyment of God, to which one proceeds through obedience. This heavenly doctrine, moreover, requires such a nature, state, and condition in all those who would receive it or make use of it toward its proper end. But what innate knowledge of God and of His will those angels who kept their own principality and habitation possessed, and with what light they were furnished — so that this light, with respect to degrees of increase, was capable of receiving those mysteries hidden from the ages in God, at length made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places through the church (Ephesians 3:10) — and what knowledge they also possess through the continuous vision of God, especially those now enjoying their reward in Christ, is not the place here to inquire.

The God-man, Jesus Christ, and mere man express the whole human race. The things to be said concerning the theology of Jesus Christ — "in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Colossians 2:3) — and concerning that knowledge which He had and has through the personal union, and through the revelations given to Him by the Father (Revelation 1:1), and because in Him dwells all the fullness of the Spirit (John 3:34), whom He received not by measure — since these cannot be contained within the scope of the dissertation upon which we are now engaged, we have judged it best to omit them entirely here. But those who are mere men either still live a mortal life, or at least can be considered as such, and are commonly called wayfarers ("For in all this life there is hope," Ecclesiastes 9:4), or else, loosed from the bonds of the body, they are called possessors. The theology of those among them who, having run their course aright and having pursued faith and obedience according to the will of God, have mercifully obtained their end and rest in the enjoyment of God — this theology (to dispatch the matter in a word) is that light of glory by which, beholding divine things face to face and God Himself as He is, filled with ineffable joy, they are eternally occupied with the praises of God and the Lamb. These things had necessarily to be premised in order that we might arrive at what we are aiming at.

According to the various state of those who are called wayfarers, their theology is also various; and this is generally twofold: namely, that of integral nature, or of creation; and that of fallen nature, or of sin. But other considerations and distributions of men who have fallen into sin must be applied below. We must deal first with the first man, in the first place.