INTRODUCTION

Chapter 92 : THEOLOGY
883
tvveen speculativeandmoraLtheology. Though
both fall .within the sphere. of reason, one is the
\vork of the pure theoretic reason, the other of
the pure practical reason.
In the opening question of the Sumnza Theo-
logica, Aquinas tries to explain why, in addi tion
to the "philosophical science built up by reason,
there should be a sacred science learned through
revelation." To an objection which claims that
"there is no needofany further knowledge, "be-
cause philosophical science can attain to knowl-
edge even of God Himself, he replies that
"there is no reason why those things which may
be learnt from philosophical science, so far as
they can be known by natural reason, may not
also '. be taught us. by another science so far, as
they fall wi thin revelation." Though they may
deal with the same object, "sciences are differ-
entiated according to the various means through
which knowledge is obtained.... Hence., the
theology included in sacred doctrine differs in
kind from that theology which is part of philos-
ophy."
In another place, A.quinas refers to the theo-
logical conclusions which the thinks
he can demonstrate-"the existence of Godand
other like truths about God which can, be
known by natural reason." Of these he says t'hat
they "are not articles of faith, but are pre-
amhIes to the articles. ... Nevertheless," he
adds, "there is nothing to prevent a man, who
cannot grasp a proof, accepting as a matter of
faith, something which in itself is capable' of
being scientifically known and den10nstrated. "
But such propositions, which belong .to both
reason and faith, are only part of sacred doc-
trine. In addition, there are the. propositions
which belong to faith alone.
"It is impossible," Aquinas writes, "to attain
to the knowledge of the Trinity by natural
reason." The triune nature of the Godhead can-
not be demonstrated philosophically; nor can
the dogma be fully comprehended by human
understanding. In Purgatory, Dante learns that
"Mad is he who hopes that our reason can tra-
verse the infinite way which One Substance in
Three Persons holds."
Though it is not a theological mystery in the
same sense, another example of a dogma, not
demonstrable by reason is the proposition that
the world began to be. "That the \vorld did not
CHAPTER 91: rrHEOLOGY
HE DISCUSSION OF THE nature and scope of
eology, its principles and methods, may refer
ther to the theology which is a part of philos-
hy or to the theology 'which is sometimes
led "dogmatic" becauseit expounds
ins the dogmas of a religious faith. Further-
those who make the distinction between
t\vo kinds of theology raise questions con-
ning their relation to one another. In so do-
they enter into the, larger problem .of the
tion offai thand reason, and the limited part
ichreasoncan play in the development ofa
ology which rests on faith.
he distinction itself is made by many
iters andin diverseways. The theology which
entirely philosophical and independent of
yreligiousfaith is usually called "natural
eology." Thename "sacred theology" is given
'Ja body ofdoctrine which finds its fundamen-
principles;irithe articles of a religious faith.
e ultimate sourceof these articles of faith.in
ish, Christian, and Mohammedan theology
the truth revealed in a sacred scripture-the
ldand New Testament or the Koran-from
Rich, by interpretation, the articles of faith
edrawn.
Bacon, for example, defines "divinephilos-
hy or natural theology" as "that knowledge
rudiment of. knowledge concerning 'God,
ichmay be obtained by the contemplation
is creatures; which knowledge may be truly
med divine in respect of the object,andnat-
1in respect of the light. The bounds of this
owledgeare that it suffices to convinceathe-
pbut not to inform religion." In contrast,
l1spired theology" or "sacred theology (which
our idiom we call divinity) is grounded only
on the word and oracle of God, and not up-
the light of nature. "
kant makes a similar distinction when he
sthat theology is based either "on reason
ne (theologia rationalis) or upon revelation
But for Kant "natural the-
designates only one kind of rational the-
A.notherkind is "transcendental theah
" which differs from the first in the method
rea.son employs. He also differentia:tes be-
fmse1f described as resting 'primarily an faith
divine, revelation, though it may' also have
me tion in reasoning from experience.
in the 18th century between the Pt"Ylr't.11"'1 .... "'1
rational or philosophical sciences;
day those \vho regard philosophy
Iation or opinion contrast it to the
disciplines \yhich are thought to be
tablished bodies of knowledge, that
The question whether theology is a
may, therefore, embrace a number of
tives. That it is an empirical or ......
science has seldom been proposed.
treated as a science, however, by
consider it as a part ofphilosophy; or it
denied that honor precisely because it
to philosophy. A third alternative
that theology is separate from nhtl",""'n.h....
it is a science as distinct in rh''l1''''lrt-"",,.-
philosophical sciences as they are from
perimental disciplines. In this third'll f-"" 1"'f"'. rII .......
the association of theology wi th religion
ligious faith seems to determine the
of theology.
It is this third alternative which
to have in mind at the conclusion ofhis
"Divinity or Theology, as it the
ence of a Deity and the immortali ty
.. has," he writes, "a foundation in
far as it is supported by experience. But
and most solid foundation isfaith or
elation." To the extent that its nrtnrtnl,c>('
from religious fai th, theology not
fit perfectly into Hume's twofold division
sciences into those which involve
soning concerning quantity or
those \vhich involve "experimental
concerning matter of fact and existence.
When he says that he would commit
flames "any volume of divinity or school
physics which does not contain either
two kinds of reasoning"-for then "it
tain nothing but sophistry and
can hardly be condemning the theology
882
I
T has .seldom been disputed that the. ques-
... tions with which theology deals are of criti-
cal significance for all the rest ofhuman know1-
edge. Even those who deny that theology is or
can be a science might be\villing. tocontede
that, if it \vere, it would deserve its traditional
title, "queen of the sciences."
It has been said that the great questions of
theology are unanswerable. Ithas been said that
theologicaLdispute or controversy is futile be-
cause the issues are not resolvable by argument.
But it has rarely been asserted,or even implied,
that our outlook would be unaltered and our
actions unaffected if \ve could know, in any de-
gree, the answers to questions concerning the
existence of the supernatural and its relation to
the visible \vorld of nature. To Plato it is of
such in1portance that he asks: "Who can be
calm when he is called upon to prove the exist-
ence of the gods?"
The main controversy, not in, but about,
theology turns on the use of such words as
"kno'vvledge
H
and "science" for a discipline
which, both in method and conclusion, seems
compelled to go beyond experience and to push
reason to (or even beyond) the limit of its
powers. In the minds of many, especially in our
day, theology is associated with religion and is
opposed to science or, if not opposed, at least it
is set apart from science as entirely different.
Those who conceive science as limited by its
en1pirical methods to the investigation of ob-
servable phenomena might not quarrel with the
allocationoftheology tophilosophy, but whether
or not they did would in turn depend on their
conception of philosophy.
As the chapters on SCIENCE and PHILOSOPHY
indicate, these two terms are identified through
a large part of the western tradition. The vari-
ous sciences are regarded as branches of philos-
ophy. But we also find a distinction being made
THE GREAT IDEAS
CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY
884
al:vays exist.," Aquinas declares, "we hold by
faIth alone; It cannot be proved demonstrative-
ly; ,,,hich is what was said above of the mystery
of the Trinity." We find in Sacred Scripture
the words In the beginning God created heaven
and earth, "in which ,vords the newness of the
'''orId is stated" and so "the newness of the
vvorld is known only by revelation."
vVith respect to such matters as belong to
faith alone, a theologian like Aquinas cautions
against the misuse of reason. "When anyone in
the endeavor to prove what belongs to faith,
brings fonvard arguments. which are not co-
gent, he falls under the ridicule of the unbeliev-
ers; since they suppose that we base ourselves
upon such arguments, and that we believe on
their account. Therefore, we must not attempt
to establish \"hat is of faith, except by authority
alone" and only "to those who accept the au-
thority." For those who do not accept the
authority of Scripture, the most that reason
can do concerning propositions peculiar to faith
is "to prove that what faith teaches is not im-
possible." Elsewhere Aquinas points out that
"although the argument from authority based
on human reason is the ,veakest, yet the argu-
ment from authori ty based on divine revelation
is the strongest."
THE FOREGOING THROWS some light on Mon-
taigne's defense of a book by Raimond de Se-
bonde, bearing the title La naturelle.
Though he calls his 'York "natural theology,"
de Sebonde, according to Montaigne, "under-
takes by human and natural reasons to establish
and n1ake good against the atheists all the arti-
cles of the Christian religion." What his op-
ponents "reprehend in his work is that Chris-
tians are to blame to repose upon human .rea-
sons their belief, which is only conceived by
fai th and the particular inspiradon of divine
grace."
Montaigne agrees that it is "faith alone that
vividly and certainly comprehends the deep
mysteries of our religion." But he also thinks
that it is "a brave and very laudable attempt to
accommodate the natural and human capabili-
ties that God has endowed us wi th to the service
of our faith. It is not to be doubted," he says,
"that it is the most noble use we can put them
to, and that there is no design or occupation
more worthy of a Christian man than
it the aim and end of all of his
studies to embellish, extend, and
truth of his belief."
The conception of rtatural theology
Montaigne appears to entertain in his
for Raimond de Sebonde" does not seem
ferentiate it from sacred theology,
all its principles are articles of faith.
from de Sebonde, Montaigne himself
think that,the existence of God or the
tali ty of the soul can be demonstrated
son. Montaigne observes "how short
constant and firm maintainers of this
clear persuasion of the immortality
fall, and how weak their arguments
they go about to prove it by human
Let us ingenuously confess that
dictated it to us, and faith; 'tis no
ture and our own reason."
Though the denial of God's existence
cording to Montaigne, "a proposition
ral and monstrous, difficul talso and
tablish in the human understanding,"
the affirmation to be no less beyond
po\ver to establish with certitude, for
produced by our own reasoning and
standing, whether true or false, are
incerti tude and controversy. "
In this, Montaigne differs not only
theologian like Aquinas, who assigns
truths to natural theology as capable of
demonstrated by reason wi thout
fai th, but also from such
cartes, Spinoza, and who
can know God by reason with more
and even (according to Spinoza)
quately, than we can know most other
"I have always considered," .&..-' ... V ..... L ......
"that the two questions respecting
the Soul ,vere the chief of those that
be demonstrated by philosophical
theological argumen1. For al though it
enough for us faithful ones to accept
of faith the fact that the human soul
perish with the body, and that
certainly does not seem possible
suade infidels of any religion
begin wi th, we prove these two facts by
of the natural reason."
Descartes, it appears, reserves
ord "theology" for sacred doctrine. What
thers, like Bacon, call "natural theology," he
eats simply as philosophy, or thatbranch of
which he calls "metaphysics." Dedicating
is Meditations to "the dean and doctors ofthe
Cred faculty of theology in Paris," he says:
have noticed that you, along with all the
did not only affirm that the exist-
of God may be proved by the natural
but also that it may be inferred from
the 'Holy Scriptures, that knowledge of Hiln is
nch clearer than that which we have of many
eated things, and, as a matter of fact, is so
sy to acquire that those who have it not are
Ipable in their ignorance."
But Descartes wishes to confess the limita-
bOS of the mere philosopher's knowledge of
od. When he came to inquire "how God Inay
more easily and certainly known than the
iogs of this world," no matter how much
ertainty and evidence I findin my reasons,"
could not persuade himself, he says, that
n the world is capable of understanding
em.... There are not so many in the world
ho are fitted for metaphysical speculations as
ere are for those of geometry."
Answering a critic who quotes Aquinas
ainst him, he later writes: "I admit along with
theologians that God cannot be compre'"
nded by the human mind, and also that He
nnot be distinctly known by those who try
entally to grasp Him at once in His entirety.
Ii" Wherever I have said that God can be clear-
distinctly known, I have understood this
()/apply only to this finite cognition of ours,
fiich is proportionate to the diminutive capac-
)'/of our minds."
FAR WE HAVE considered the distinction be-
een natural and sacred theology-or be-
een philosophy and theology-as it is made
the Christian tradition by writers conscious
the difference between faith and reason, or
velation and demonstration. In pagan an-
quity, there seems to be no equivalent of
Cred theology. "The various modes of wor-
ip, which prevailed in the Roman world,"
'bbon tells us, "were all considered by the
as equally true; by the philosopher as
false; and by the magistrate as equally
... The supersti tion of the people was
885
not embittered by theological rancour; nor
was it confined by the chains of any speculative
system." It was "the elegant mythology of
Homer," he says, not reasoning, which "gave
a beautiful, and almost a regular form to the
polytheism of the ancient world."
Of the Greek philosophers, Gibbon remarks
that "they meditated on the Divine Nature as
a very curious and important speculation," but
only the Stoics and thePlatonists "endeavored
to reconcile the jarring interests of reason and
piety." Plato's criticism of the poets in the
Republic for their impiety, and his rational de-
fense of piety in the Laws, accompanied by a
demonstration of the existence of the gods, may
be taken as examples of ancient theological dis-
course within a religious context. Another ex-
ample, and from quite another point of view, is
Cicero's De Natura Deorum, which Gibbon
praises as the best guide to the opinions of the
philosophers concerning the tenets of polythe-
Ism.
But neither Cicero nor PIato treats theology
as a science. The ancient philosopher who does
and who, moreover, regards theology as. the
highest of the. speculative sciences, seems to
proceed without reference to or benefit of pre-
vailing religious beliefs. Aristotle dismisses "the
school of I-Iesiod and all the theologians [\vho]
thought only of what was plausible to them'"
selves." He refers to the legends of the gods
which "our forefathers in the most remote ages
have handed down to their posterity ... in the
form of a myth ... with a view to the persua-
sion of the multitude and to its legal and utili-
tarian expediency." But the highest science,
which Aristotle sometimes calls "first philoso-
phy," he also calls "theology." It deals with the
immaterial and the insensible, the immovable
and eternal. We may call it "theology," he
writes, "since it is obvious that if the divine is
present anywhere, it is present in things of this
sort." In another place he says, "there are three
kinds of theoretical sciences-physics, mathe-
rnatics, theology . .. and of these the last
named is best, for it deals with the highest of
existing things."
At the beginning of the Metaphysics, Aris'"
totle gives another reason for thinking that
theology is a divine science: not that it is di...
vinely inspired, but that, having the divine for
THE GREAT IDEAS
CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY
886
its object, it is the science "most meet forGod
to have.... Such a science either God alone
can have, or God above all others." The title
given the book in which Aristotle attempts to
develop this science comes in thelater tradition
to be the name given to speculation concerning
immaterial and insensible substances. What
Aristotle calls "theology," Descartes, as we
have seen, calls "metaphysics" in order to dis-
tinguish it from the theology based on
tion.
Whether the theology of a pagan philosopher
is commensurable wi th the theology, of Jewish
or Christian thinkers, even. when the latter
tempt to be purely philosophical or natural
theologians, is a question which deeply probes
the relation of reason to fai tho For even when
reason tries to proceed independently of faith,
the religious faith of a community may tinge
the concepts the philosopher uses anddefine the
problems'he undertakes to solve. Itmay bebne
thing to prove the existence of a Prime Mover,
and another to know by reason the nature and
existence of the God who in the, beginning
created heaven and
ham,' Isaac, and Jacob, the God of the Chris-
tians, whon1 Pascal distinguishes from the God
of the philosophers.
Augustine explains his attitude as a theolo-
gian toward the theories, of the philosophers
touching divine matters. "I have not under-
taken," he says, "to refute all the vain theo"
logical opinions of all the philosophers, but only
of such of them as, agreeing in, the belief that
there is a divine nature, and that this divine na-
ture is concerned about human affairs, do never-
theless deny that the worship of the one un-
changeable God is sufficient for the obtaining of
a blessed life after death, as well as at the pres-
ent time." Since "Piato defined the wise man
as one who imitates, knows, and loves this God,
and who is rendered blessed through fellowship
with Him in His own blessedness, why discuss
with the other philosophers? It is evident that
none come nearer to us than the PIatonists. "
Plato, according to Augustine, "is justly pre-
ferred to all the other philosophers of the Gen-
tiles"; those among his followers who show "the
greatest acuteness in understanding him ... en-
tertain such an idea of God, as to admit that in
Him are to be found the cause of existence, the
ultimate reason for the understanding,
end in reference to which the whole life
regulated." So amazing, to his mind,
parallels between certain insights
Plato and the wisdom of Sacred ..... ...
Augustine is almost inclined to
"Plato was not ignorant of those
he does not think it necessary to
whether Plato had acquaintance with
ings of Moses and the prophets, because
basic ,truths, which were revealed to
brews, were made known to the gentiles
the light of nature and reason. "That
known of God," the apostle had said,
manifested among them, for God
fested it to them."
Therefore Augustine feels justified
any truth from Plato which is COI1Sls:teIlt
Christian faith. Aquinas, borrowing
Aristotle, explains that "sacred doctrine
use of the authority of philosophers
questions in which they were able to
truth by natural reason." Sacred .....
the doctrines of the philosophers, he
as though it stood in need of them, but
order to make its teaching clearer." It
sense that Aquinas calls philosophy
maiden of theology.
Others seem to take a different
relationship. Montaigne wonders
would not be better if "the divine "'Ir1lrTt"'fno
queen and regent of the rest," kept
apart, and he quotes St. Chrysostom
feet that philosophy has "long been
from the holy schools as a handmaid
useless." Hobbes goes further.
tradi tional theology as a mingling
metaphysics \vith Scripture, and claims
"bringing of the philosophy and
Aristotle into religion by' the
caused the "many contradictions and
ties" which "brought the clergyinto
tion both of ignorance and of fraudulent
tion, and inclined people to revol t
Hegel, however, dismisses the rt'"f't-1r1IctYl
is often made concerning the
Christian theology, at least in its
period, on pagan philosophy.
the Church and the Councils," he
stituted the dogma; but a chief
constitution was supplied by the
lopment of philosophy." That certain dog-
were introduced into the Christian religion
tough "the instrumentality of philosophy ...
not sufficient ground for asserting that they
re foreign to Christianity and had nothing to
with it. It is a matter of perfect indifference
here a thing originated; the only question,"
egel insists, "is, 'Is it true in and for itself?'
any think that by pronouncing the doctrine
be Neo-Platonic, they have. ipso facto ban-
ed it from Christianity. WhetheraChristian
trine stands exactly thus and thus in the
Ie ... is not the only question. The Letter
Is, the Spirit makes alive."
MPARED WITH SACRED theology, the subject
tter of natural theology and the scope of its
oblems seem to be extremely narrow. At
.st, it is only a part of philosophy, and some
titers treat it as no more than one part of
etaphysics.
Kant, for example, divides n1etaphysics into
tee parts---theology, cosmology, and psychol...
y-according to his conception ofmetaphys-
as having "for the proper object of its in-
iries only three grand ideas: God,
d Immortality." Asa branch of transcenden-
Ispeculation, theology is concerned primarily
hh the problem of God's existence. Similarly,
tistotle's metaphysical inquiries include more
an his theology. His theology begins only
terhe has discussed the nature and being of
nsible substances. It is stated mainly in Book
II of the Metaphysics where he.considers the
istence and character" of immaterial sub-
nces, and of the one purely actual being
hich is God.
Descartes' conception seems to be broader,
or he regards 'the immortality of the. soul as
ell as the existence and nature of God as being
haracteristically theological problems even
hen they are treated in metaphysics and by
e methods of the philosopher. Because these
o problems concern spiritual beings, Adam
mith also groups them together under the
atne "pneumatics" or "pneumatology," which
e identifies with part of
hilosophymost emphasized "in the
es of Europe where philosophy was taught
ly as subservient to Bacon alone
.eems to separate natural theology entirely
887
from metaphysics, which, along with physics,
is for him a part of natural rather than divine
philosophy. But though he vvould limit natural
theology to that kno\vledge of God \vhich can
be dra\vn from nature, and excludes attempts
to induce from nature "any verity orpersua-
sion concerning the paints of faith," he grants
that natural as \vell as divine theology may
treat of "the nature of angels and spirits," as
"neither inscrutable nor interdicted."
The subject matter bf sacred theology, or
what he calls "divinity," is, according to Ba'"
con's account, much more extensive. He first
divides it into "matter of belief" and "matter
of service and adoration"; and from these two
derives the "four main branches of divinity:
faith, manners, liturgy, and government." The
matter of faith contains "the doctrine of the
nature of God, of the attributes of God, and of
the \vorks of God. " Under manners, Baconlists
the consideration of divine law and the breach
ofit by sin: Ii turgy concerns the sacraments and
rituals of religion; government, theorganiza-
tion, offices, and jurisdictions of the church.
As its title indicates, the Summa Theologica
of Aquinas endeavors to set forth the sum of
theological knowledge. In addition to the topics
and problems peculiar to sacred doctrine,. the
subject matters treated in the Summa seem to
represent the whole range of human inquiry-
almost co'-extensive with the scope of the natu-
ral sciences and philosophy, both speculative
and moraL
Aquinas explains the encyclopedic character
of the Sumn1a by pointing out that to have God
as the subject matter of theology means that
sacred doctrine treats "all things under the as-
pect of God, either because they are God Him-
self, or because they refer to God as their begin'"
ning and end." The unity of theology in cover-
ing so "vide a diversity of matters consists in the
single formality under \vhich they areconsid-
ered-the formality of being divinely
That is why "objects \vhich are the subject mat-
ter of different philosophical sciences can yet be
treated by this one single sacred science under
one aspect, namely, insofar as they can be in-
cluded in revelation."
Thus, for example, '. in the preamble to his
Treatise on Man, Aquinas writes: "The theolo-
gianconsiders the nature of man in relation to
TI-IE GREAT IDEl\S
the soul; but not in relation to the body, except
insofar as the body has relation to the. soul."
This emphasis is dictated by the articles of
Christian faith which concern man, in both
body and soul. Similarly, with respect to moral
matters, Aquinas explains that the theologian
"considers human acts inasmuch as luan is there-
by directed to happiness," and he takes account
of the circumstances of human acts because they
may excuse from sin, "the consideration of
which belongs to the theologian." I t belongs to
the theologian only when sin is conceived "as
an offense against God," but to the moral phi-
losophers when it is conceived "as something
contrary to reason."
A SOMEWHAT CONTRARY view of the relation of
fai th and reason seems to be taken by Locke.
"Whatever God hath revealed," he says, "is
certainly true; no doubt can be made of it. This
is the proper object of faith; but whether it be
a divine revelation, or no, reason must judge."
Reason, not faith, is the ultimate test of truth,
in theology as in philosophy. "Reason must be
our last judge and guide in everything." If
reason finds something "to be revealed from
God, reason then declares for it, as much as for
any other truth, and makes it one of her dic-
tates. "
In many of the great books we find a less
CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY 889
authority \vhich is great indeed, but in ment and controversy seem to be serviceable
matter is not infallible." in the propagation and defense of the faith.
The aspect of choice, of obstinately prefer- Aquinas, for example, distinguishes the various
ng one's own opi?ion against. a superior types of dispute in which a Christian theologian
thority, is emphasized by AquInas, but he can engage-\vith heretics, with Je,vs, \vith in-
the specification that heresy is a fidels. "We can argue \vith heretics from texts
of Christian faith, a species of unbehef In in Holy Scripture," he \vrites, "and against
the heretic defies the authority of the those who deny one article of faith we can argue
choosing "not what Christ really from another. If our opponent believes nothing
. fl . d" of divine revelation, there is no longer any ught, but the suggestIons 0 lIS o,vn mIn .
e quotes a statement by Augustine that we means of proving the articles of faith by argu-
auld not accuse of heresy "those who, how'" ment, but only of answering his objections-if
er false and perverse their opinion may be, he has any-against faith."
efend it without obstinate fervor" and are But it is necessary to add the qualification
ready to mend their opinion when they have that the reasons employed "to prove things
und the truth because they do not make a that are of faith are not demonstrations; they
hoice in contradiction to the doctrine of the are either persuasive arguments sho,ving that
hurch." It is not the falsity of the opinion what is proposed by faith is not impossible; or
hich makes it heresy, for until the point of else they are proofs drawn from the principles
aith has been defined by the authority of of faith, i.e., from the authority of I-Ioly Writ.
hurch, theologians may differ, and even be In ... Whatever is based on these principles is as
fror, without being heretical. . well-proved in the eyes of the faithful, as a con'"
The inference may be drawn that progress 1S elusion drawn from self-evident principles is in
in the refinement and precision of theo- the eyes of all."
logical doctrine as the dogn:as of a religion are Furthermore, Aquinas points out, "since
are fully stated and the lIne between ortho- faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the
and heresy becomes more clearly contrary of a truth can never be demonstrated,
ugustine, who is one of the great formatIve it is clear that the proofs brought against faith
eologians for the Protestant as well as are not demonstrations, but arguments that can
atholic tradition, devotes a large part of hIS be answered." Descartes seems to hold a similar
riting to the criticism of heresies-the great view. Defending his opinions in a letter to
rian heresy concerning the Trinity, the Nes- Father Dinet, he declares: "As to theology, as
orian or Monophysiteheresy concerning the one truth can never be contrary to another, it
ncarnation, the Manichean heresy concerning would be a kind of impiety to fear that the
He existence of evil, and the Pelagian heresy truths discovered in philosophy were contrary
oncerning grace and good works. to those of the true Faith."
"While the hot restlessness of heretics,"
ugustine writes, "stirs questions about many
rticles of the catholic fai th, the necessi ty of
efending them forces us ... to investigate
hem more accurately, to understand them
are clearly, and to proclaim them more ear'"
.ystly"; and the question mooted by an ad-
ersary becomes the occasion of instruction.
to Aquinas, "the profit that
heresy is beside the intention of heretIcs,
tor it consists in the constancy of the faithful
put to the test and makes us shake off our
luggishness and search the Scriptures more
(lrefully. ' ,
To Augustine and Aquinas, theological argu'"
volves "the supposition of the supreme
pendent good, that is, the existence of
According to Kant, a Supreme
the speculative reason, a mere ideal,
tIf'
faul tless one-a conception \vhich
cro\vns the system of human cognition,
objective reality of \vhich can neither be
nor disproved by pure reason." It is this
which moral theology remedies. "We
sume," he says, "a moral world-cause,
an Author of the world, if we are to set
ourselves a final end in conformitv to the
law." But, he adds, "this moral a:gument
intended to supply an objectively
of the existence of God. It is not meant to
onstrate to the skeptic that there is a
that he must adopt the assumption of this
osition as a maxim of his practical
wishes to think in a manner consistent
morality."
THE PROBLEM OF THE proof of God's
though central in theology, is more
cussed in the chapter on GOD. Here \ve
cerned wi th the nature of theology
branch of learning or inquiry. Since the
on METAPHYSICS necessarily touches
ogy as a philosophical discipline, it
visable to devote attention here to
things which are peculiarly the
cred theology.
Heresy is one of these. A scientist or
pher may be cri ticized for his errors,.
theologian, only the man who tries to
some article of faith, can be called a
the strict sense of that word. ,L-\ r"r"n'rrlfr\rY
view of the relation bet\veen church
Hobbes defines heresy in political
"Heresy," he writes, "is nothing
private opinion, obstinately t n f-" f r'\orl
trary to the opinion which the Public
-i.e., the Sovereign-"has COlmnaaIldc:d
taught." But, according to Pascal,
God \vas able to instruct the
faith," and so "it is heresy to resist the
of the faith, because this amounts to
ing of our own spirit to the
But, he adds, "it is no heresy,
an act of presumption, to disbelieve
ticular facts, .because this is no more
posing reason-it may be enlightened
888
IT APPEARS FROM THE foregoing that sacred
theology is both speculative and. practical (or
moral). It deals with the nature of divine
things and with human acts, but ,vith the
latter only so far as they have God for their
rule or end. "Although among the philosoph-
ical sciences," Aquinas writes, "some are spec-
ulative and others practical, sacred doctrine in-
cludes both."
Even though it is made on .the level of the
philosophical sciences, Kant's distinction be-
tween speculative and moral theology seems to
be based on a different principle. For Aquinas
the speculative and the practical parts of theol-
ogy deal with different problenls, suchas .God,
the Trinity, creation, and the angels on the one
hand, and beatitude, the virtues, divine law,
sin, grace, and sacraments on the other. But for
Kant both speculative and moral theology deal
with the problem of God's existence. They dif-
fer only according to the manner in which the
theoretic and the practical reason undertake to
solve this problem.
"All attempts of reason to establish a theol-
ogy by the aid of speculation alone are frui t-
less," writes Kant. Consequently, "a rational
theology can have no existence unless it is
founded upon the laws ofmorality." The postu-
lates of pure practical reason-of immortality,
free will, and the existence of God-"all pro-
ceed from the principle of morality, which is
not a postulate but a law by which reason de-
termines the will The morallaw in-
volves, as a necessary condition, "the existence
of the summum bonum," and that in turn in-
OUTLINE OF TOPICS
I. The subject matter of theology: the scope of its inquiry; the range of its problems
2. The distinction between natural and sacred theology: its relation to the distinction be-
tween reason and fai th
3. Theology as a philosophical discipline
3a. Natural theology in relation toother parts of philosophy: philosophiaprima, meta..
physics, natural philosophy
3b. The distinction between speculative and moral theology: theology as a work of
the practical reason
3C The limitations of speculative theology: the insoluble mysteries or antinomies
891
190a-c; 236b-240b esp 239a-240b / Practical
Reason, 349a-352c esp 350c..3S1a / ]udge111ent,
S78a-b
2. The distinction between natural .and sacred
theology: its relation to the distinction
between reason and faith
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK VII, par 13-27
47c-S2c / City ofGod, BK VIII, CH 1-12"264b,d-
273a; BK XI, CH 2 323a-c /Christian Doctrine,
BK II, CH 40 6SSb-6S6a; CH 42 656c-d
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q I,
AA 1-2 3b-4c; AA 4-6 5a-7a; Q 2, A 2, REP I
1Id-12c; Q 12, AA 12-13 60d-62b; Q 32, A I
175d-178a; A 4 180b-d; Q 46, A 2 2S3a-255a;
Q 84, A 5 446c-447c
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART II-II, Q I,
A 5 383b-384b; Q2, AA 3-4 392d-394b; A 10
399b-400b
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART I, 66a-c
25 l\1oNTAIGNE: Essays, 208a-209c; 212a-d;
238d-239c
30 BACON: Advancement ofLearning, 19b-c; 39d-
40c; 4Ib-42a; 95d-IOlc esp 96c-97c / Novum
Organum, BK I, APH 65 114b-c
31 DESCARTES: ... Rules, III, 4d-5a I Discourse,
PART I, 43c / Meditations,69a-71a,c I Objec-
tions and Replies, 12Sb-126a; 168b-169a; 284d
REFERENCES
CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY
To find the passages cited, use the numbers in type, are the volume and page
numbers of the passages referred to. For example, In 4 HOMER: [bad, [265-283] 12d, the
number 4 is the number of the volume in the set; the number 12d IndIcates that the pas..
sage is in section d of page 12.
PAGE SECTIONS: When the text is printed in one column, the letters a and b refer to the
upper and lower halves of the page. For in 53 JAMES: Psychology, 116a-119b, the
begins in the upper half of page 116 and ends In the lower half of page lIg. When the text IS
printed in t\VO columns, the letters a and b refer to the upper and lower of left-
hand side ofthe page, theletters c and d to the upper and lower halves of SIde of
the page. For example, in 7 PLATO: Symposium, 163b-164c, the the lower half
of the left-hand side of page 163 and ends in the upper half of the nght-hand SIde of page. 164.
AUTHOR'S DIVISIONS: One or more of the main divisions of a work (such as PART, eH,
SECT) are sometimes included in the reference; line numbers, in brackets, are given in cer-
tain cases; e.g., Iliad, BK II [265-283112d.
BIBLE REFERENCES: The references are to book, chapter"and verse. When the King James
and Douay versions differ in title of books or numbering of chapters or verses, the King
James version is cited first and the Douay, Indicated by a (D), follows; e.g., OLD TESTA-
MENT: Nehemiah, 7:45-(D)II Esdras, 7:46.
SYMBOLS : The abbreviation "esp" calls the reader's attention to.
relevant parts of a whole "passim" signifies th.at the tOpIC IS dIscussed Intermit-
tently rather than continuously In the work or passage CIted.
For additional information concerning the style of the references, see the Explanation of
Reference Style; for general guidance in the use of The Great Ideas, consult the Preface.
1. The subject matter of theology: the scope of
its inquiry; the range of its problems
7 PLATO: Republic, BK VII, 388a-398c esp 389b-
391h, 397a-398c / Laws, BK x 757d-771b
8 ARISTOTLE: Metaphysics, BK I, CH 2 [g82
b
28-
983aII] 50Ia-b; BK VI, CH I 547b,d-S48c esp
[I026
a
6-33] 548a-c; BK XI, eH 7
S92d.. S93a
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK VII, par IJ-27
47c-S2c / City ofGod, BK VIII, CH 1-12 264b,d-
273a; BK XI, CH 2 323a-c / Christian Doctrine,
BK II, CH 40 655b-656a
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q 1
3a-IOc; Q 75, PREAMBLE 378a-b; Q 84, PRE-
AMBLE 440b-d;PART I-II, Q 7, A 2, ANS and
REP 3 652d-6S3c
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I-II, Q 71,
A 6, REP 5 110b-Illb; Q III, A 4, ANS 354c-
3S5d
30 BACON: Advancement of Learning, 41b-42a;
9Sd-IOlc
31 DESCARTES: Discourse, PART I, 43c
33 PASCAL: Vacuum, 35Sb-3S6b
35 HUME: HUl1'lan Understanding, SECT XII, DIV
132 , SOgc
39 SMITH: Wealth of Nations, BK v, 336b-337a
42 KANT: Pure Reason, 33a-d; 119a-c; 176a-c;
I':>rotestant refornlers, like Luther, later atta
theology itself as detrimental to the purity
Christian faith and the spirit of religion. Itis
this vein also that the "unpr
itable subtility or curiosity" and the "fruit
speculation or controversy" in divinitY,a
speaks of the "extreme prejudice which b
religion and philosophy have received and
receive by being comnlixed together."
\Vhen the Student in Faust says, "I'm now
almost inclined to try Theology," j\1ephisto
eles replies:
I would not wish to lead you so astray.
In what this science touches, it would be
So hard to shun the false, misleading wa)l';
So much of hidden poison lies therein,
Yau scarce can tell it from its medicine.
That, however, is the voice of the devil; a
from the point of view of those who see
conflict between faith and reason or between
piety and inquiry, the attempt to separate reli-
gion from theology often looks diabolical.
THE GREAT IDEAS 890
4. Sacred theology: faith seeking understanding
4a. The relation of sacred theology to philosophy: theology as the queen of the sci-
ences
4b. The principles of sacred theology: revealed truth; articles of faith; interpretation
of Scripture
4C The roles of reason and authority in the development of sacred doctrine: theologi-
cal argument and proof
4d. Sacred theology as a speculative and practical science
4e. The nature and forms of theological heresy
5 Criticisms of theology: the dogmatic, sophistical, or over-dialectical character of theo-
logical controversy
favorable view of the merit or profit in theolog-
ical controversy. Its excesses and mumbo-juln-
bo are travestied and caricatured by Rabelais
and Sterne; its futility and folly a.rethesubject
of bitter complaint by I-Iobbes and Bacon; its
intolerance is .condemned by Locke and Mill.
Gibbon, who reports the disputes which raged
through ten centuries of Christendom, seldom
speaks kindly of the disputants. He refers to
"the exquisite rancor of theological hatred";
and in describing the fury of the conflict .be-
tween the Arians and the defenders of the Ni-
cene creed, he says that, "in the midsts of their
fierce contentions, they easilyforgot the doubt
which is recommended by philosophy, and the
submission which isenjoined by religion."
In the 1v1iddle .A.ges, mystical theologians,
like Peter Damiani or Bernard ofClairvaux,
attack asimpious or irreligious the kind of the-
ology which borrows from the philosophers and
makes use of the liberal arts, especially the
techniques of the dialectician.. In similar vein
THE GREAT IDEAS
4d. Sacred theology as a speculative and prac-
tical science
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q I; A 4
5a-b
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART II-II, Q45,
A 3 600e-601a
4e. The nature and forms of theological heresy
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK III, par 10-12
15b-16b; par 18 18b; BK VII, par 25 51a-c /
City of God, BK XVI, CH 2, 422b-d; BK XVIII,
eH 51 502d-503d / Christian Doctrine, BK III,
CH 33 670b-c
19 AQUINAS: Suml1za Theologica, PART I, Q 28,
A I, CONTRARY 157e-158d; A 3, CONTRARY
160a-e; Q 31, A 2, ANS 172b-173e; Q 32, A 4
180b-d
Ab to 4e CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY 893
31 DESCARTES: Discourse, PART I, 43e / ]Yfedita- 18b; Q 12, A 12 60d-6Ie; Q 29, A 3, REP I
tions, 69a-71a,e / Objections and Replies, 125b- 164c-165c; Q 32, A I 175d-178a; A4 180b-d;
126a; 162e-165d; 283d-284d Q 46, A 2 253a-255a
39 SMITH: Wealth ofNations, BK V, 336b-337a 20 .AQUINAS: SUl1una Theologica, PART II-II, Q 2,
40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 307a-309b; A10 399b-400b
670b-c 21 DANTE: Divine COlnedy, PARADISE, XXIV 142d-
46 HEGEL: Philosophy of [listory, INTRO, 158c.. 144b
160b; PART III, 308e-309d 23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART I, 66a-e; 83b; PART
II, 137b-e; 14ge-d; 163a-b; PART III, 165a-e;
4b. The principles of sacred theology: revealed 167a-b; 241e-242a
truth; articles of faith; interpretation of 25 MONTAIGNE: Essays, 208a-294b passim
Scripture 29 CERVANTES: Don Quixote, PART I, 122b-c
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK III, par 9 15a-b; 30 BACON: Advancement of Learning, 12e-13e;
, BK VI, par 6-8 36e-37e; BK VII, par 13-27 41b-d; 95d-96e; 97b-c / Novum Organuln, BK
47e:-52e / Christian Doctrine 621a-698a,e I, APH 65 114b-e
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q I 31 DESCARTES: Discourse, PART I, 43e / Medita-
3a-IOe; Q 3, A I, REP 1-5 14b-15b; Q 29, A 3, tions, 69a-71a,e / Objections and Replies, 125b-
REP I 164e-165e; Q 32, A I 175d-178a; A 4 126b; 127e-d; 162e-165d
180b-d; Q 46, A2 253a-255a; Q 51, A 2, REP I 32 MILTON: Paradise Lost, BK XII [552-589] 331a-
276b-277a; Q 68, A I, ANS 354a-355e; Q 102, 332a
A I, ANS and REP 4 Q 113, A 7, 33 PASCAL: Provincial Letters, 163a-166a / Pen-
REP I 580b-581a sees, 226 212b-213a; 242- 253 217b-220a; 265-
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I-II, Q 290 22Ib-225a; 557-567 272b-273b; 775 323b-
102, A 2 271b-272a; PART II-II, Q I, AA 5-10 324a; 862-866 342b-343b;903348a / Vacuum,
383b-390d; Q 2, A 10 399b-400b 355b-356b
21 DANTE: Divine Comedy, PARADISE, XXIV 142d- 35 LOCKE: Toleration, 5a-b / Human Under-
144b esp [61-81] 143b-e standing, BK III, ClI IX, SECT 23 291b-e; BK IV,
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART II, 137b-138b; CH XVII, SECT 24 380e-d; CH XVIII 380d-384b
160b-c; PART III, 167a-b; 18Ia-182d; 241a- passim; CH XIX, SECT 14 387d-388a
244d; 246e 35 HUME: Human Understanding, SECT XI 497b-
30 BACON: Advancelnent of Learning, 95d-96e I 503e passim, esp DIV I 02 DIV 14
Novum Organum, BK I, APH 65 114h;..c 498b-e, DIV 107 49ge-500b; SECT XII, DIV 132,
31 DESCARTES: Discourse, PART I, 43e 50ge
33 PASCAL: Provincial Letters, 78b-80b; 163a-164b 40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 206a-b; 307a-314a
/ Pensees, 570-579 273b-276a; 642-692 290b- esp 308d-309d, 310b-312a, 313d-314a; 348e-d;
301a; 775 323b-324a / Vacuum, 355b I 438b-442a; 670b-e
Geometrical Demonstration, 440a-b 41 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 134a-151c esp 136d-
35 LOCKE: Human Understanding,BK III, CH IX, 140d, 143e-145d; 198a-e; 462d-463a; 520b..
SECT 9, 287b; SECT 23 291b-e; CH x, SECT 12 521e
294b-e 44 BOSWELL: johnson, 173b-174a
38 ROUSSEAU: Inequality, 333d; 362d 46 HEGEL: Philosophy of History, INTRa, 158e-
40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 307d-308a; 160b; PART III, 308e-309d; PART IV, 360e-
346b-e 361a
41 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 230a-b
44 BOSWELL: johnson, 173b-174a
46 HEGEL: Philosophy of History, PART III, 308e-
309d
51 TOLSTOY: TVar Clnd Peace, EPILOGUE II, 696a-c
4e. The roles of reason and authority in the
development of sacred doctrine: theo-
logical argument and proof
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK I, par I 1a-b; BK
VI, par 5-7 36b-37b; BK VII, par 13-'-27 47e-
52e; BK XII, par 32'-36 107a-108e; par 41-43
110a-d; BK XIII, par 36 120e-d / City of God,
BK VIII, CH 1-12 264b,d-273a; BK xx, CH I,
530a-b; eH 30, 560a,e / Christian Doctrine
621a-698a,e passiln
19 AQUINAS: Sunzma Theologica, PART I, Q I
3a-10e; Q 2, A 2 11d-12c; Q 3, A 5, ANS 17e-
3c. limitations of speculative theologY:th
Insoluble mysteries or antinomies e

8 ARISTOTLE: Metaphysics, BK I, CH 2 [9
82b
28_
983aI I] 501a-b
18 AUGUSTINE: Con.ftssions, BK VI, par 6-8 36c-
37e; BK VII, par 13-27 47e-52c / City of Goa,
BK VIII, CH 1-12 264b,d-273a; BK XI c
323a-e ' FI 2
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, P.ART I Q
d
' 2,
AA 1-2 10 -12e; Q 12, A 12 60d-6le; Q 13 62b-
75b; Q3
2
, A I 175d-178a; Q46, A2 253a-255a'
Q 88, A 3 472e-473a; Q 94, A I, REP 3
503a
21 DANTE: Divine Comedy, PURGATORY, III [r6-
45] 56a-b
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART II, 163a-b; PART I
165b .. II,
30 BACON: Advancement ofLearning, 41b-d' 96d-
97b '
31 DESCARTES: Objections and Replies, 112a-114c'
123a; 127a-d; 168d-169a '
33 PASCAL: Pensees, 185-195 205a-210b; 221-
2
4
1
212a-217b; 243-253 218a-220a; 543 266a
35 HUME: Human Understanding, SECT VIII, DIV
81 487a
40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 12d-13a; 159a-d'
186a-d; 308c-d '
42 KANT: Pure Reason, 143a-145e; 152a-153c;
174b-177b; 187a-192d esp 190a-e; 200c-209d;
218d-223d; 234e-240b esp 239a-e / PracticaZ
Reason, 291a-292a; 344a-349b esp 344a-c,
348b-349b; 351b-352c / judgement, 547d;
588a-607e esp 588a-591b, 593d-596e, 599d-
600a, 600d-601e, 603b-d, 606d-607e
4. Sacred theology: faith seeking understand.
ing
592d, 593d-595e, 596e-598b,
607d-609b
4a. The relation of sacred theology to philos-
ophy: theology as the queen of the sci.
ences
18 AUGUSTINE: Confessions, BK VII, par 13-
2
7
47e-52e / City of God, BK VIII, CH 1-12
264b,d-273a; BK XI, CH 2 323a-c / Christian
Doctrine, BK II, CH 40 655b-656a; CH 4
2
656e-d
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q I, AA
5-6 5e-7a; Q84, A5446e-447e
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I-II, Q71,
A 6, REP 5 110b-111b; Q III, A 4, ANS 354c--
355d; PART II-II, Q2, A 10 399b-400b
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART I, 65b-66c; 70
83b; PART III, 165b; PART IV, 247d; 260b-c
267a-c; 269b
25 MONTAIGNE: Essays, 155a-c
30 BACON: Advancement of Learning, 17b-20a
39d-40e; 41b-d; 95d-101d / NovumOrganutn
BK I, APH 65 114b-e; APH 89 124a-d
892
(2. The distinction between natural and sacred
theology: its relation to the distinction be-
tween reason andfaith.)
32 MILTON: Paradise Lost, BK XII [552-587] 331a-
332a
33 PASCAL: Pensees, 245 218b; 265-29 221b-
225a; 543 266a; 561-563 272b-273a
35 LOCKE: lIuman Understanding, BK III, CH IX,
SECT 2.3 291b-e; BK IV, CH XVII, SECT 23-24
380b-d; CH XVIII 380d-384b passim; CH XIX,
SECT 14 387d-388a
35 HUME: Human Understanding, SECT XII, DIV
I32,50ge
40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 307a-309d esp
308e-309a; 346b-c
42 KANT: Practical Reason, 346b-347a; 349a-352c
esp 350e-351a; 353a-354d / judgement, S99d-
600a; 603b-d; 604d-606d esp 606a-d; 607d-
609b
43 MILL: Utilitarianism, 455a-e
51 TOLSTOY: War and Peace, BK v, 196a-197c
3. Theology as a philosophical discipline
3a. Natural theology in relation to other parts
of philosophy: philosophia prima, meta-
physics, natural philosophy
7 PLATO: Republic, BK VII, 388a-398e esp 389b-
391b, 397a-398e / Timaeus 442a-477a,e esp
447a-453e, 455a-457b, 475d-477a,e
8 ARISTOTLE: Physics, BK I, CH 9 [I 92a33-b2]
268e-d; BK II, CH 2 [I94b9-I5] 271a; CH 7 [I98a
22-31] 275b-e / Heavens, BK III, CH I [298bI 3-
24] 390a-b / Metaphysics,BK I, CH 1-2 499a-
SOle esp CH 2 [982b28-983aII] 501a-b; BK VI,
CH I [I026
a
6-33] 548a-e; BK XI, CH 7 [I064a28-
bI3] 592d-593a
16 PTOLEMY: Almagest, BK I, 5a-6a
19 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I, Q I, A8,
ANS 7e-Bd
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART IV, 269b-e
30 BACON: Advancement of Learning, 2e-4e; 15d-
16b; 39d-40e; 41b-42a; 43a-46a esp 44e-45a /
Novum Organum, BK I, APH 65 114b-e
31 DESCARTES: Meditations, 69a-71a,e / Objec-
tions and Replies, 283d-284d
33 PASCAL: Pensees, 77 186a
42 KANT: Pure Reason, 33a-d; 119a-e; 176a-e;
190a-e; 236b-240b esp 239a-240b / Practical
Reason, 349a-352e esp 350e-352e / judgement,
603d-613a,c esp 606d-607e
46 HEGEL: Philosophy of History, PART IV, 368d-
369a,c
3b. The distinction between speculative and
moral theology: theology as a work of
the practical reason
42 KANT: Pure Reason, 236b-240b esp 239a-240b
/ Practical Reason, 291a-296d; 349a-352e esp
350c-351a / judgement, 588a-613a,e esp 588a-
895
CHAPTER 92: THEOLOGY
ADDITIONAL READINGS
Listed below are works not included in GredtBooks ofthe Western !V.
orld
, ,but relevant to :he
idea and topics with which this chapter deals. These works are dIvIded Into two groups.
1. Works by authors represented in this ..
II. Works by authors not represented in thIS collection.
h d te lace and other facts concerning the publication of the works cited, consult
of Additional Readings which follows the last chapter of The Great Ideas.
H. MORE. The Antidote .Against Atheism, BK I,
CH 1-10 ..
R. BARCLAY. An Ap()logy for the True Chrzsttan
Divinity
CUDWORTH. The True Intellectual System of the
Universe
MALEBRANCHE. Dialogues on Metaphysics and Re-
ligion, II, VIII
LEIBNITZ. Theodicy
J.. BUTLER. The Analogy of Religion .,
VOLTAIRE. "Figure in Theology," "TheologIan," In
A Philosophical Dictionary
PALEY. Natural Theology
COMTE. The Catechism of Positive Religion
J. H. NEWMAN. An Essay on the Development of
Christian Doctrine
--. The Idea of a University, DISCOURSE II-IV
--. An Essay in Aid of a Gramlnar of Assent
L. STEPHEN. An Agnostic's Apology
HARNACK. History of Dogma
STIRLING. Philosophy and Theology
WARD. Naturalism and Agnosticism
A. E. TAYLOR. The Faith ofa Moralist. SERIES I (I)
J. S. HALDANE. The Sciences and Philosophy, LECT
XVII . .
PENIDO. Le role de l' analogie en theologie dogmattque
WHITEHEAD. Adventures of Ideas, CH 10
MARITAIN. Science and Wisdom, pp 7-13
6
GILSON. The Unity ofPhilosophical Ex,perience; CH 2
__. Reason and Revelation tn the Mtddle Ages
FENTON. The Concept of Sacred Theology
JAEGER. Humanism and Theology
BARTH. Dogmatics in Outline
I.
AUGUSTINE. On the Profit of Believing
____. On Faith in Things Unseen .
AQUINAS. On the Trinity of Boethzus, QQ 1-3
____. Summa Contra Genttles, BK I, CH 1-9
____. Compendium of .
SPINozA.Tractatus .Theologtco-Poltttcus (Theologt-
cal-Political Treatise), CH 14-
1
5 . . .
KANT. Untersuchung uber die der Grund-
siitze der naturlichen Theologre und .
J. S. MILL. "Theism," in Three Essays on Reltgton
II.
CICERO. De Natura Deoru1n (On the Nature ofthe
Gods), II
PROCLUS. The Elements of Theology . .
SAADIA G AON. The Book of Beliefs and Optntons,
INTRODUCTORY TREATISE .
BAlLARD. Introductio ad Theologtam
AIMONIDES. The Guide for the Perplexed, INTRO
ONAVENTURA. On the Reduction of the Arts to
Theology
......._.. _. Breviloquium, PART I (I). .
_._._. Itinerarium Mentis in Deum (The Ittnerary of
the Mind to God)
iR. BACON. Opus Majus, PART II .
t\LBERTUS MAGNUS. Summa Theologtae, PART I
DUNS SCOTUS. Opus Oxoniense, PROLOGIUM.
ALBO. The Book of
CALVIN. Institutes of the Chrzstzan Reltgron . .
BOEHME. The Way from Darkness to True Illumt..
nation
For: The consideration of topics or problems which fall within the scope of theology, see ASTRON-
OMY 6; BEAUTy 73.; CAUSE 7-7d ; DESIRE 7b;ETERNITY 3, 4d ; GOD 2b, 2d, 4-Si ; GOOD AND
EVIL 2-2b; HAPPINESS 7-7d; HISTORY sa-sb; HONOR 6-6b; IMMORTALITY 2, 3a; INFINT'r
7a-7d; JUSTICE II-lIb; LIBERTY sa-sd; LOVE sa-'-sc; MATTER 3d; MIND log; ONE AND
MANY I b, 6a-6c; OPPOSITION 2d-2e; PUNISHMENT se(I )-se(2) ; RELATION 2-3; RELIGIJJN
2C; SAME AND OTHER, 6; SIN 3-3e, 6a-6e; SOUL 4b-4c; TIME 2b-2C; VIRTUE AND ViCE
8d-8d(3); WILL 4a-4b, 7e-7e(i); WISDOM Id; WORLD 3a-4e (3) , 8.
Other discussions of the relation ofreason and faith, or of the relation of theology to religion,
see KNOWLEDGE 6c(S); LOGIC 4f;OPINION 4a; PHILOSOPHY 6c; RELIGION la, I b( I), 6b,r5g;
TRUTH 4a; WISDOM IC.
The relation of philosophy to theology, and for the conception of natural theology as a
of philosophy, see METAPHYSICS 3a; PHILOSOPHY Ia; RELIGION 6f-6g.
Discussions bearing on sacred theology as a science, and on its principles and methods, see
LOGIC 4f; REASONING 6a; RELIGION 6b, 6c( I); SCIENCE 2a.
Discussions bearing on the natureand extent of revealed truth and on the articles of religiQus
faith, see ANGEL 3-4; EVOLUTION 7a ; GOD 2a, 7-9; IMMORTALITY 3b ; MAN 9b(r)-9b(,),
IIa-IIC; PROPHECY 4a-4d; SIN 3-3e; SOUL 4d(3); VIRTUE AND VICE 8e; WORLD'4e(.3).
The problems of interpreting the Word of God or Sacred Scripture, see LANGUAGE I
SIGN AND SYMBOL se.
Considerations relevant to the relation of theology to jurisprudence, see LAW 3a-3b(2).
Various attacks on theological doctrines, and for criticisills directed against the kind
speculation which is theological, see DIALECTIC 3c; GOD 10-13; IMMORTALITY 2; KNOW
EDGE 5c; METAPHYSICS 2d, 4a; OPINION 4b; PHILOSOPHY 6b; RELIGION 6f-6g; SOUL 3
\VILL 5c; WORLD 4a.
894 THE GREAT IDEAS 4e to
(4. Sacred theology:faith seeking understanding. 5. Criticisms oftheology: the dogmatic, sophis_
4e. The nature and forms of theological tical, or over-dialectical character of
heresy.) theological controversy ,
20 AQUINAS: Summa Theologica, PART I-II, Q 64, 23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART I, 51d-52b; 54o-
c
.
A 4, REP 3 69b-70a; Q 81, A I, ANS 163a-164d; 71a-b; 84a; PART II, 163a-b; PART III, 1650:
PART II-II, Q 10, AA 5-6 429c.;.431b; Q II 438a- PART IV, 247d-248a; 269b-271c; 274a-'c '
442b 24 RABELAIS: Gargantua and Pantagruel, B':k I
21 DANTE: Divine Comedy, HELL, IX [I06J-XI [9] 9b; 21c-24a; BK n,78b.-80d; 101b-106a;
13b-15b; PARADISE, XIII [112-142] 126c-d III, 172d-173c; 186d-188c
23 HOBBES: Leviathan, PART I, 78a-b; PART III, 35 HUME: HumanUn.derstanding, SECT VIII, DIV'
213d-214b; 238b-239b; PART IV, 248c-d 62, 478c; SECT XI, DIV 107 499c-500b
25 MONTAIGNE: Essays, 154c-d 36 SWIFT: Gulliver, PART I, 22b-23a
30 BACON: Advancement of Learning, 101a-b 36 STERNE: Tristram Shandy, 222a-224a; 366a-
33 PASCAL: Provincial Letters, 128b-137b; 141a- 376a; 421b-422b
166b / Pensees, 862-865 342b-343b 39 SMITH: Wealth of Nations, BK V,
35 LOCKE: Toleration, Id-2a; 21c-22d 40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 312b-313b;345d_
38 ROUSSEAU: Social Contract, BK IV, 438d-439c 346b; 347a; 439a; 441a-d; 670b-c
40 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 182d-184b; 308a-b; 41 GIBBON: Decline and Fall, 134a; 143c-145d
310b-313d passim, esp 312b-313b esp 145b-c; 148a-b; 149c-d; 156a;328a-o'
41 GIBBON: Declne and Fall, 134a-138a; 143c- 422a-d; 476b-477a . ,
145d; 149b-152c passim; 198a-c; 422a-d 46 HEGEL: Philosophy ofHistory, PART III,3130-c;
52 DOSTOEVSKY: Brothers Karamazov, BK v, PART IV, 360c-d
127b-137c 47 GOETHE: Faust, PART I [1982-2000] 47a-b
CROSS-REFERENCES