theology

n., pl., -gies.

1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
3. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary.

[Middle English theologie, from Old French, from Latin theologia, from Greek theologiā : theo-, theo- + -logiā, -logy.]

1. Ironically or humorously used to refer to religious issues.

2. Technical fine points of an abstruse nature, esp. those where the resolution is of theoretical interest but is relatively marginal with respect to actual use of a design or system. Used esp. around software issues with a heavy AI or language-design component, such as the smart-data vs. smart-programs dispute in AI.

---

For more information on theology, visit Britannica.com.

Theology is the systematic reflection on religious beliefs. Generally, religion is first experienced and only later contemplated. The Bible is overwhelmingly a record of primary religious experience. As such it contains very little theological reflection. This is true of the first two divisions of the Jewish Bible, the Pentateuch, which is the most authoritative portion, containing the legislative core of Judaism, and the books of the Prophets. However, the last division, the Hagiographa, in which the human response is more dominant, contains the beginnings of reflection in areas where experience seems to clash with cherished religious beliefs. Although traces can already be found in the Later Prophets, it is the books of Job, Ecclesiastes, and some of the Psalms that make a sustained effort to grapple with the problem of theodicy, an attempt to understand the justice of God in the face of the suffering of the righteous.

While the Bible itself does not contain a theology, there are hints at the possibility of theology. The fact that there is no immediate Divine rejection of Abraham's (Gen. 18:25), Moses' (Ex. 32:11-13), or Job's questioning of God's moral nature indicates that God's moral will is accessible to human comprehension and to human criticism. This paves the way for theology.

There is considerable theological reflection in the Talmud; however, it is scattered throughout the corpus and not developed systematically. Instead of engaging in formal argumentation, the sages expressed their views in terse epigrams in which fundamental religious insights are compressed into a single general saying. Thus on the question of Free Will versus Divine omniscience: "Everything is foreseen, yet permission is given; the world is judged with mercy yet the verdict is according to one's deeds" (Avot 3:15). Theological reflections were left in a fluid form and wide differences of opinion were tolerated. The basic premise of talmudic Judaism remained that the Torah represents Divine Revelation, so that all parts of biblical law, both its moral and its ritual portions, are equally binding and authoritative and are to be meticulously observed.

In certain areas of vital religious experience, the rabbis explored and broadened their understanding of basic concepts. Thus the Bible calls for both the fear and love of God (Deut. 10:12). The rabbis asked: What does that mean? How is this to be achieved? Do not fear and love conflict? Do religious deeds require proper intention and purity of motive? Even on the control principle of Divine Revelation, nuances of approach developed as the rabbis probed the mysteries of God's communication with man, having important implications for their understanding of the nature of the Torah. Sometimes they engaged in speculation unrelated to a biblical text: "For two and a half years the schools of Hillel and Shammai debated whether man would have been better off if he had not been created ..." (Er. 13b).

The talmudic rabbis did not fix the contents of the Jewish faith in the form of dogmas. However, it was clear to them that acceptance of the Bible implies belief in a moral God, Providence, Reward and Punishment, Miracles, Repentance, revelation, and Redemption. They insisted upon these norms of faith even though their exact formulation was not reduced to a catechism.

Beginning with Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE-50 CE), new and external pressure arose to stimulate Jewish theology: contact with foreign philosophic thought. The great cosmopolitan city of Alexandria in Egypt was at that time the place where Greek-speaking Jews could receive full exposure to the rich Hellenic culture. Convinced that both Hellenic wisdom as the fruit of God-given human reason, and the Bible as the word of God, represented the truth, Philo set about to show both his fellow Jews and the Greeks that the teachings of the sacred Jewish tradition were in conformity with Greek philosophy. He did this by freely applying the allegorical method of interpretation to the biblical text in a systematic and thoroughgoing way. Thus, he developed the concept of the Divine Logos (Word) or Wisdom of God, which he identified with God's attributes of Justice and Mercy, and with the realm of the Angels, as the intermediary between the abstract, metaphysical God and the material world. Man has access to this spiritual world by means of intuition or mystical apprehension for which he can prepare himself by ascetic living. While remaining on the whole faithful to the religious principles of Scripture, such as human freedom and revelation, Philo's theology tended in the direction of a personal mystical vision. By wedding Scripture to Philosophy and its highest forms to morality, Philo made clear the universal thrust of Judaism.

Philo has been called "the first theologian." His historic significance has been characterized as follows: "Between a philosophy which knew not of Scripture and a philosophy which tries to free itself from Scripture, European thought for 17 centuries was dominated by what is generally called 'medieval philosophy.' Philo is the founder as well as the direct and indirect source of this type of philosophy" (H.A. Wolfson).

The inclination to theologize did not arise again until the Middle Ages. This time the movement lasted from the beginning of the ninth century until the 15th century and found expression in religious poetry, biblical exegesis, and popular sermons, as well as in special philosophical works.

Instead of being considered as simply "a handmaid" of traditional Jewish thinking, in the Middle Ages philosophy became the central Jewish value in wide circles. The stimulus to theologize was again involvement in a foreign culture, that of Islamic-Arabic civilization which through the common medium of the Arabic language brought Jews into contact with the highly developed Islamic Kalam theology and, through it, with Greek philosophy. This time, however, theology was needed to defend Judaism against direct intellectual attack from a number of different quarters. A Jewish sect called Karaism (see Karaites), which acknowledged only the authority of the Bible and grew popular in the ninth century, attacked the reliability of the rabbinic tradition. The expanding religions of Islam and Christianity, in order to justify their rupture with Judaism, conducted an aggressive attack on the mother religion. The fact that all three faiths were revealed religions only sharpened the controversy. Judaism had to refute the arguments that the revelation given to Israel had been abrogated by the one given to Muhammad or had been fulfilled by the appearance of Jesus. In this variegated and tolerant Islamic-Arabic civilization was also heard the voice of the dualistic Parsee religion that attacked all monotheisms and particularly the doctrine of Creation.

In the midst of such intellectual ferment, naive faith in traditional authority was most difficult to maintain. Reason remained the only arbiter in the face of conflicting claims to exclusive truth. In order to "answer the heretic" both within and without, Jewish thinkers were compelled to reexamine Judaism in theological terms. However, as in the case of Philo centuries earlier, the given components from which the theology was to be formed were not only the biblical and rabbinic traditions but a certain philosophic content which the intellectual climate of the time assumed bear the incontestable imprint of human reason. Therefore, the task of Jewish theology in the Middle Ages was not merely analytic, i.e., a matter of applying reason to a body of received religious doctrine in order to clarify meaning, systematize concepts, eliminate inconsistencies, and justify truth claims; it was also asked to reconcile two separate contents: the religious tradition and contemporary "philosophy." The latter was believed to be the product of reason employed in the synthetic mode, i.e., metaphysical speculation.

In this period, the contemporary philosophy was represented by the Kalam theology in its Mutazilite version, as well as by Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism as interpreted by the Islamic commentators.

The major figures and works in medieval Jewish theology start with Saadiah Gaon of Egypt and Babylonia (882-942) and his Sefer ha-Emunot ve ha-De'ot ("Book of Beliefs and Opinions"); Solomon Ibn Gabirol (c. 1020-1057) of Spain, a great religious poet who worked out a metaphysical system along Neo-Platonic lines, and his Fons Vitae ("Fountain of Life"); and Baḥya Ibn Pakuda (11th cent.) and his Ḥovot ha-Levavot ("Duties of the Heart"), a devotional work designed to intensify the inner religious experience, the opening chapters of which contain a theological treatment of the concept of God, His existence, and His unity. Abraham bar Ḥiyya of Barcelona (first half of the 12th cent.), in his Megillat ha-Megalleh ("Scroll of the Revealer"), introduces a concern for history in his expanded Neoplatonism. Judah Halevi of Toledo (1075-1141) was a religious poet who wrote the Kuzari, a philosophic work in the form of a dialogue between the king of the Khazars<ibn Daud (c. 1110-1180) of Toledo wrote Emunah Ramah ("The Exalted Faith") based primarily on Aristotle. Moses Maimonides (1135-1204) of Cordova, Fez, Fostat (Egypt), author of the major philosophical work, Moreh Nevukhim (Guide for the Perplexed), was the leading philosophical figure of this period, who created the most comprehensive and penetrating synthesis of Judaism and Aristotelianism. Levi Ben Gershom (Gersonides; 1288-1344) of southern France wrote Milḥamot Adonai ("Wars of the Lord"), a scholastic and technical discussion of major problems of religious philosophy using the Arab philosopher Averroës' version of Aristotle as a starting point. Ḥasdai Crescas (c. 1340-1410), in his Or Adonai ("Light of the Lord"), analyzes the basic doctrines of Judaism according to their dogmatic importance; and another Spanish thinker, Joseph Albo (c.1360-1444), in his Ikkarim ("Basic Principles"), discusses the dogmas of Judaism, adopting an eclectic position that incorporates aspects of Maimonides, Halevi, and Crescas.

Common to all medieval theologians, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian, although they obviously developed their ideas in different ways, was the major premise that God has provided man with two sources of truth: Scripture, which embodies God's revelation, and human reason, by the aid of which some men discovered the same truths found in Scripture as well as others which, while not found therein, do not contradict Scripture. These latter truths are called philosophy. Since God is the source of both types of truths, there can be no conflict between them. Misunderstanding Scripture or mistakes made in reasoning can cause apparent conflict. Scripture must be interpreted in the light of what is known to be true from reason, while human reason has to be checked by what is given in Scripture.

In defending Judaism against the attacks of the Karaites and the other revealed religions, Jewish theologians were compelled to find a rational answer to the questions: Why believe in Judaism rather than in some other religion? Wherein lies the superiority of the Sinaitic revelation? In order to do this effectively, it was essential to have a general theory of knowledge. This meant involvement in the field of general philosophy.

All of the issues relating to the concept of God, His unity and uniqueness, the nature of His attributes, the conflict between God's omniscience and man's freedom, and His relationship to time and space and to the world of nature and man, are thoroughly discussed by all the medieval Jewish theologians.

Some shortcomings of medieval Jewish theology emanated from the historical fact that important philosophical questions were intertwined with empirical ones. In many instances, this theology could not rise higher than the limited astronomical or physical or biological views upon which the philosophical issues were based. Thus the medievals' views on prophecy or on immortality of the Soul were shaped by their understanding of psychology, while their perception of creation and miracles was affected by their understanding of physics. Some of these Jewish thinkers were able in certain cases to challenge the assumptions of the times. Maimonides contested the theory of the eternity of the universe on logical grounds. Judah Halevi acknowledged that philosophy can lead to knowledge of God, but that only religion (Judaism) can develop the special religious disposition of man and bring him to a life with God, i.e., communion with Him. Ḥasdai Crescas provided a thoroughgoing critique of Aristotelianism and described a Judaism freed of Greek distortions: Positive attributes may be ascribed to God; the primary content of the idea of God is goodness and not thought; love of God results from joy in His goodness.

Not all Jews were happy with the achievements of Jewish theology. Once the philosophic works of Maimonides were translated into Hebrew and spread throughout the Jewish world, a violent controversy erupted which continued throughout the 13th century. Some of the specific charges leveled against Maimonides, such as criticism of his treatment of the doctrine of Resurrection of the dead, were misguided. Other criticisms were directed not against any of Maimonides' specific teachings but against his general rational method, which many felt would be misused by the general, untrained Jewish public and lead to a weakening of their faith. Some scholars, such as Naḥmanides, stood above the controversy, but took serious issue with some of Maimonides' biblical interpretations as well as with the reasons given by the latter for the commandments.

Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786), the first modern Jewish philosopher, was also a major theologian of Judaism. Beginning with the German Enlightenment, the unity of Jewish culture and the insularity of the Jewish community was shattered, at least for some Jews. The challenge was no longer narrowly intellectual but social and cultural in the broadest terms. In this philosophical milieu, in which reason still held sway, the tendency was to find a justification for the principles of universal religion. Unlike his medieval forebears, Mendelssohn had broad philosophic interests and contributed in the general areas of metaphysics, psychology, and esthetics. However, such was the philosophical climate of the age that his general philosophic efforts to justify belief in the existence of God and immortality of the soul were quite in keeping with traditional Judaism.

Mendelssohn makes use of medieval theology's approach to argue for the superiority of the Jewish revelation over the Christian and Muslim revelations that are based on miracles. However, he rejects the medieval notion that revelation delivers both religious and rational truths. Since all men are in need of eternal truths such as the existence of the One omnipotent God and the immortality of the soul, the source of these truths could not be a particular revelation to a particular people. Secondly, historical events, no matter how impressive, cannot import rational conviction. Therefore, according to Mendelssohn, revelation presupposes rational truth which is available to the Jews, as it is to all men in the universal religion of reason. Judaism, therefore, is not a revealed "religion" but a revealed law which prescribes proper behavior for the Jewish people; it is of eternal validity. The Torah presupposes and represents the universal religious truths, so that the Jewish people has the mission "by its very existence to proclaim them unceasingly unto the nations, to teach, to preach, and seek to maintain them." On this view, Judaism consists of three levels of belief: eternal ideas concerning God, Providence, and the soul which are provable by human reason and hold true universally; historical verities about the Jewish past established by historical evidence; and commandments known and authorized by revelation.

The radical and extreme changes in the condition of the Jewish people called the Enlightenment and Emancipation created enormous social pressures for religious change. An increasing number of Jews found themselves oriented to a life which was essentially secular, a small portion of which was allotted to "religion." While Mendelssohn could still believe that he had reconciled traditional Judaism and philosophy, the next generation began to demand that Judaism itself be Westernized.

In the early part of the 19th century, mainly in Germany, a group of scholars, each in his own way, began to work out a theology of Judaism which in their view could be reconciled with the advanced thought of their time, and which constituted the ideology of the Reform movement. These included Solomon Ludwig Steinheim (1790-1866), Samuel Holdheim (1806-1860), and Abraham Geiger (1810-1874). Steinheim suggested that not all of the Bible was Divine Revelation and that each age must develop its own criteria of selectivity. Holdheim maintained that even laws Divine in origin may be given only for particular circumstances. Geiger identified Judaism's national development as being in the direction of Universalism with the elimination of all particularism and rationalism which goes with the concepts of a Chosen People, Zion, and a personal Messiah. A similar theology was formulated by Kaufman Kohler in 1885 for the American Reform Movement.

Generally, the leaders of traditional Judaism were removed from the philosophic ferment that seized Germany in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Whatever theologizing took place was in terms of medieval categories. An exception was Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888), who was the first major spokesman for a traditional position ready to theologize in a modern key. Considered to be the founder of Modern or Neo-Orthodoxy, Hirsch believed that Judaism obligated the Jew to learn the physical and social sciences, since God manifests Himself in nature and in history. He was, however, critical of Mendelssohn and Maimonides, claiming that both had permitted an exaggerated regard for the philosophy of their day to distort their perception of Judaism. Judaism must be understood "from within itself" in order to appreciate as objectively as possible what it is, what it demands, and what it is trying to achieve.

A centrist position was staked out by Zacharias Frankel (1801-1875), a rabbi and critical scholar who founded what has been called the "positive-historical" school, which in America evolved into the Conservative movement. In terms of practice, this school was opposed to drastic changes and urged retention of the tradition. However, it sought to ground ultimate religious authority not in the interpretation of a Divine document by an elite but in the sentiments of the totality of Israel (Kelal Yisra'El). This approach was continued in America by Solomon Schechter (1847-1915).

Associated with Conservative Judaism is the theology of Mordecai M. Kaplan (1881-1983) called Reconstructionism. In common with the former is his emphasis on traditional behavior and the significance of the Jewish community. Influenced by the sociological theory of Emile Durkheim and the philosophy of John Dewey, Kaplan reinterpreted the fundamentals of Judaism, God, Torah, and Israel in thoroughly naturalistic terms. God is not a personal Deity but the totality of natural forces in the universe making for the moral good. Torah is not Divine Revelation but "a recall of the struggles of the Jewish people to educate its own conscience," and Israel as a group and as a community is the dynamic creator of Judaism which is essentially "the advancing civilization of the Jewish people."

Of great influence in recent Jewish theology has been the work of the German thinkers Hermann Cohen (1842-1918), Franz Rosenzweig (1886-1929), and Martin Buber (1878-1965), who remained outside the denominational framework of Judaism. Although for Cohen God remained a regulative idea and not a reality while religion was only an historic presupposition for ethics, his writing remains a source of great value in the explication of the ethical content of Judaism (see Ethics).

Both Rosenzweig and Buber were able to break out of the mind-set of speculative idealism and affirm the reality and independence of God, the world, and the individual. Using the new "existential" approach , Rosenzweig was able to speak meaningfully of the biblical categories of creation, revelation, and redemption. Similarly, Buber, on the basis of his "I-Thou" dialogical philosophy, provided a basis for a real relationship between the individual and God, the Eternal Thou. Also Buber's emphasis on the metaphysical significance of inter-subjective "relationships" worked to demonstrate the importance of the notion of community as a key to appreciating both the Ḥasidic and the Zionist movements.

More recently, Jewish theology has been enriched by the works of thinkers who span the denominational spectrum and address themselves not only to the perennial problems but also to the novae of our day, the Holocaust and the establishment of the State of Israel. These are Abraham Joshua Heschel, Joseph Baer Soloveichik, Eliezer Berkovits, Emil Fackenheim, Louis Jacobs, Andre Neher, Abraham Isaac Kook, Arthur A. Cohen, and Jakob J. Petuchowski.

---

The common impression that the theological climate of late medieval and early modern Europe was monolithic is far from the reality. On the eve of the Renaissance and Reformation, theology was marked by a pluralism that created a state of ambiguity. The various theological schools of the day—nominalism, Scotism, Thomism, Augustinianism, Franciscanism, humanism, and others—vied for influence and dominance. On many levels, the differences among these schools were minimal, while on others they were profound, resulting in significant disagreements over church teaching.

As the changes of Renaissance society began to take hold, the theological approach of the Middle Ages no longer met the needs of the times and the spiritual longings of the people. The spirit of renewal that characterized the Renaissance called for an adaptation of traditional teaching, an appreciation of the historical context in the study of the Scriptures and the church fathers, and the application of the Gospel to the personal needs of the faithful. Scholasticism, which sought to bridge the gap between faith and reason by bringing reason to bear on theological matters, seemed to many in the Renaissance to be out of touch with contemporary realities. As Scholasticism immersed itself in dialectical speculations, it became more irrelevant, failing to move individuals to a more genuine living out of their Christian commitment. It was Scholasticism's orientation toward the abstract that drew the criticism of Renaissance thinkers such as Francesco Petrarch (1304–1374) and Desiderius Erasmus (1466?–1536), who proposed the "New Learning" associated with humanism as a means of revitalizing theology. For Erasmus, learning was to lead to virtue, scholarship to God, and thus, the restoration of theology was to be the means toward the revival of a living and lived Christianity.

Thomistic Revival

Besides the humanist critique, Scholasticism also came under assault by the Protestant reformers. The Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) was criticized for its treatment of Aristotle and the Holy Scriptures. Ironically, the polemical engagement with Scholasticism that came to characterize the Renaissance and the Reformation resulted in a rehabilitation of Thomism itself. Leading this rebirth of Thomism was the Dominican Jean Capréolus (c. 1380–1444), whose defense of the theology of Thomas sparked a new interest in his thought in the late fifteenth century. More important for this revival of Thomism was the work of another Dominican, Tommaso de Vio (1469–1534), known as Cajetan. Between 1507 and 1520 Cajetan wrote what was to become an extremely influential commentary on the Summa Theologica of Thomas, which exhibited a refreshing originality.

Thomism received a powerful stimulus and a wide dissemination from the Salamanca School, especially with the work of the Spanish Dominican Francisco de Vitoria (1486?–1546), who based his teaching largely on the Summa Theologica. Vitoria evolved his own method by considering questions rather than particular sayings of the Summa Theologica, initiating a new school of Thomistic thought. The popularity of his lectures and conferences allowed him to have far-reaching influence.

The new Scholasticism that resulted from the revival of Thomism sought, like its medieval counterpart, to reconcile faith and reason. But, unlike the abstractions and speculations of late medieval Scholasticism, it sought a theology that was simpler, clearer, and more relevant to the lives of people. In many ways it was more practical as it reexamined the method of theological proof, confronted the issues raised by the reformers, sought answers to the ethical issues raised by the colonization of the New World, and emphasized popular religious instruction and preaching. By the middle of the sixteenth century, Thomism seemed to have triumphed over other theological schools. Not only did Thomists dominate the Spanish universities, but at the Council of Trent (1545–1563), Thomism was clearly in ascendancy. Many of the Tridentine decrees reflected the teaching of Thomas, as did the Roman catechism and the theological manuals used by the seminaries. Many of the new religious orders of the period, especially the Society of Jesus, declared Thomas to be their official teacher. The constitutions of the society legislated Thomas, along with the Bible, as the basic text in theology. Given this Thomistic emphasis within the Society of Jesus, many of the leading Thomists of the late sixteenth-century were Jesuits—Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621), Francisco de Toledo (1515–1582), and Francisco Suárez (1548–1617). The climax of this Thomistic revival came with the declaration of Thomas as a "Doctor of the Church" by Pope Pius V in 1567.

Dogmatic Theology

Humanism's critique of Scholasticism along with its desire for a scripturally based theology led to the development of dogmatic theology as a distinct theological discipline. The major figure in this development was the Dominican theologian Melchior Cano (1509–1560). In his De Locis Theologicis (1563), he put forth the essential role of what he called auctoritates ('positive sources') in the work of theology—Scripture, the church fathers, and the councils. He demonstrated that theology took its principles from these sources. Thus, the quality of the conclusions in theology was determined by the quality and certitude of these sources. Cano's work looked to formulating these sources, establishing the criteria for assessing their value, and to positing the conditions under which they best served their purpose. The work created a theological methodology that was decisive in the development of a dogmatic theology that was positive in nature.

Dogmatic theology received an important impetus from the Council of Trent, which saw the need to provide an organized body of common doctrine. This need, together with the concern for the sources and the strong sense of dogma emerging from Trent, constituted the first stage of a recognizable dogmatic theology. The first aim of such a theology was to present the actual teaching of the church together with the theological note proper to it, followed by the exposition of that teaching. Hence its aim was pedagogical.

Patristic and Biblical Theology

Humanism's call for a return to the sources opened up new possibilities for theology. The importance placed on the study of the Bible, along with the revival of the writings of the church fathers, had a significant effect on theology in the Renaissance and the Reformation. In the Scholastic approach to theology, the Scriptures had lost their centrality and were relegated to an arsenal of evidence called upon to buttress the speculative arguments of the theologians. However, for the humanists, the concern was to restore Scripture to its place of centrality from which theology itself would emerge. For this to happen, theology needed to rely not on the Latin Vulgate, but rather on the original text of the Scriptures. Erasmus, in Education of a Christian Prince (1516), argues that the great weapon of the Christian is the knowledge of Holy Scripture, since it is the wellspring of Christian piety. Through a return to Scripture, theology would be reformed. In turn, this scriptural revival would lead to a reform of Christian life and society.

The recovery of the patristic sources was an equally important contribution of humanism to theology. Here again, Erasmus played a significant role. He saw the fathers as engaged in genuine theology as opposed to the theologians of the day. Their authority derived from their closeness in time as well as in spirit to the divine source, and their chief value lay in their interpreting and helping to understand the Scriptures. Moreover, the writings of the fathers instructed and inspired individuals in living a Christian life. This reflects Erasmus's understanding of theology as practical in nature, as a guide to life rather than a subject for debate, and as a matter of transformation rather than speculation. Since Erasmus saw in the church fathers a more authentic and effective transmission of the teachings of Christ, he sought to make them better known through his patristic editions.

Besides the restoration of theology, the writings of the church fathers became the arsenal for controversial theology. This form of theology, which was seen as a first step toward the renewal of Catholic theology, developed as an answer to the doctrinal novelties of the reformers. The fathers provided the necessary witnesses for those aspects of Catholicism that were being challenged by the reformers. Controversial theology set a clear line of demarcation between the Catholic faith and the teachings of the reformers. Consequently, the teaching of theology entailed discriminating the true from the false—that is, that which is Catholic from that which is heretical—in order to prepare for the battle against the adversary. Controversialists rose up not only in Germany with Johann Eck (1486–1543) and Peter Canisius (1521–1597), but also in England with John Fisher (1469–1535) and Cardinal Reginald Pole (1500–1558). The most famous of the controversialists was Robert Bellarmine, who held the chair in controversial theology at the Roman College run by the Society of Jesus. Bellarmine's method was highly influential as he surveyed the whole field of Protestant-Catholic differences. A similar approach was employed by Francisco Suárez, who also taught at the Roman College. Suárez made clear distinctions between traditional church teachings and the novelties of the reformers. Suárez, along with Bellarmine, came to symbolize the long line of controversialists who championed the cause of the Counter-Reformation.

Mystical Theology

Another offshoot of the return to the sources was the deepening of mystical theology. The renewed interest in Pseudo-Dionysius (c. 500 C.E.), along with the scriptural revival, particularly of the Old Testament, fostered the mystical theology of the Renaissance. The mystical theologian focused on those Christians who, having conquered sin and its evil inclinations, and having grown in grace, drew near to Christ and were united to him. Mystical theology was not concerned with the good or the better so much as what was the best, which consisted in intimate union with God. Thus, mystical theology emphasized conforming the human will to the will of God through the successive stages of purgation, illumination, and contemplation. Mystical theology was especially vital in the life of St. Teresa of Ávila (1515–1582) and St. John of the Cross (1542–1591).

Moral Theology

Throughout the Middle Ages practical handbooks for confessors were always available to assist the faithful in the living out of a good life. The Thomistic revival of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was a step of considerable importance in the evolution of moral theology, which differed from its medieval counterpart. Moral theology came to be understood as the science of Christian life and action. It treated of the last end of the human person, of the morality of human acts, of natural and positive law, and of ecclesiastical sanctions within the context of theological reflection. Thus, it became a science distinct from dogmatic or speculative theology, embodied in a new literary genre, the Institutiones morales (Moral instructions).

Distinct from moral theology is ascetical theology, which is less concerned with the good and the evil, the licit and the illicit, the permitted and the forbidden, but is more interested in the greater and lesser good. The proper function of this branch of theology is to deal with the illuminative way.

Martin Luther (1483–1546)

Overthrowing the Scholasticism that he knew, which was mostly nominalist in orientation, Martin Luther went back to the Scriptures to rediscover the message of salvation. Distrustful of human reason in fallen humanity, he sought to substitute for Scholastic theology a theology that was devout and scriptural. Proceeding from the authority of Augustine, Luther initiated a movement for reform of Christian doctrine and life that shattered the unity of Christendom.

The theological reformation initiated by Luther resulted from a rediscovery of God through Christ in the Scriptures. This rediscovery culminated in the twin banners of the Protestant Reformation—sola fide (by faith alone we receive Christ and his righteousness) and sola scriptura (authority resides in the Bible alone). The problem that plagued Luther was the concept of the iustitia Dei, which he understood as a punitive justice. In his view, God was a stern judge who weighed merit against sins. It was impossible, in Luther's mind, for sinners to stand before God in righteousness. This was the theological dilemma that culminated in the tower experience, so called because his new insight into the Gospel came to him in the tower of the Augustinian monastery in Wittenberg. The insight he gained in this experience led Luther to understand God's righteousness not as a demanding justice, rather as his mercy. The righteousness of God is no longer a demanding justice before which an individual may stand by virtue of his or her own good works and the forgiving grace of God. The righteousness of God is now primarily the grace which transforms and makes one righteous. Human activity no longer has any part in the ultimate determination of one's destiny. Grace alone enables one to stand before the righteousness of God. Humanity is righteous before God because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Belief in that act makes one just.

The essence of Luther's theology rested upon a different conception of the relationship between God and humanity. From his view of salvation based on faith grew most of the other doctrines of Protestantism. Good works played an important role in Luther's theology, but always as a result of faith, not the cause of it. Faith frees the individual by separating works from salvation. Once freed from the continual concern over salvation, the true believer could devote his or her life to doing good out of gratitude to God and not because it would contribute to salvation. Therefore, faith is not the end of Luther's theology, rather its beginning. From faith grows love, the active expression of the true Christian's faith. Thus, many elements of Catholicism were rejected as unnecessary.

John Calvin (1509–1564)

The heart of John Calvin's theology, the core of which he acquired from Luther, was belief in the transcendent majesty and absolute sovereignty of God. The knowledge of God was the ultimate aim of life for Calvin. This knowledge was not an abstract knowledge, rather knowledge of God in relation to humanity; it could be acquired through creation and through Scripture. In the Scriptures we know God through Jesus and thus, Calvin understood the Bible as the only authority for our knowledge of God, which reveals all that should and can be known about Him.

However, Calvin insisted that the essence of God is inscrutable and that an infinite chasm separates the divine from the human. Due to the Fall, all humanity is corrupt and spiritually deformed. Therefore, humans are worthless in the sight of God. Yet, despite humanity's depravity, God did not abandon humans. The only mediator possible between God and humanity is Jesus. Through his atoning death on the cross, reconciliation was made possible. Through the redemptive grace of Christ and the gift of faith received from the Holy Spirit comes a spiritual union with Christ. This union brings about a regeneration or sanctification that renders the believer "born again," becoming a new creature in Christ and the inheritor of salvation. This results not from any human merit or effort but from faith in Christ.

Calvin took this idea one step further. The justifying grace of Christ is not for everyone, only for those whom God preelects. God's word germinates only in the elect, those whom he has already chosen for salvation even before their creation. Only on these individuals does Christ's redemption have any effect. The rest of humanity is predestined to perdition.

Conclusion

Despite the critiques launched against the church by many Renaissance humanists, most remained within the institutional framework of Catholicism. Lutheranism and Calvinism diverged from the mainstream of the Renaissance when it exaggerated the Augustinian focus on the depravity of humanity and the servitude of the human will.

Bibliography

Althaus, Paul. The Theology of Martin Luther. Translated by Robert C. Schulz. Philadelphia, 1966.

Bagchi, David V. N. Luther's Earliest Opponents: Catholic Controversialists, 1518–1525. Minneapolis, 1991.

Dowey, Edward A. The Knowledge of God in Calvin's Theology. New York, 1952.

George, Timothy. Theology of the Reformers. Nashville, 1988.

Gritsch, Eric, and Robert W. Jenson. Lutheranism: The Theological Movement and Its Confessional Writings. Philadelphia, 1976.

Kaiser, Edwin G. Sacred Doctrine: An Introduction to Theology. Westminster, Md., 1958.

Mac Kenzie, R. A. F. "The Concept of Biblical Theology." Catholic Theological Society of America Proceedings 10 (1955): 48–73.

Niesel, Wilhelm. The Theology of Calvin. Translated by Harold Knight. Philadelphia, 1956.

Olin, John C. Six Essays on Erasmus and a Translation of Erasmus' Letter to Carondelet. New York, 1979.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. 5 vols. Chicago, 1971–1989.

Wendel, François. Calvin: Origins and Development of His Religious Thought. Translated by Philip Mairet. Reprint. Durham, N.C., 1987.

—FRANCESCO C. CESAREO

IN BRIEF: The study of God and of religious beliefs.

The best theology would need no advocates: it would prove itself. — Karl Barth (1886-1968)

Quotes:

"Dogmatic theological statements are neither logical propositions nor poetic utterances. They are shaggy dog stories; they have a point, but he who tries too hard to get it will miss it." - W. H. Auden

"Theology is a science of mind applied to God." - Henry Ward Beecher

"Theology is but our ideas of truth classified and arranged." - Henry Ward Beecher

"Only a very bad theologian would confuse the certainty that follows revelation with the truths that are revealed. They are entirely different things." - Denis Diderot

"It's the generally accepted privilege of theologians to stretch the heavens, that is the Scriptures, like tanners with a hide." - Desiderius Erasmus

"Let us put theology out of religion. Theology has always sent the worst to heaven, the best to hell." - Robert Green Ingersoll

See more famous quotes about Theology

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)

Dansk (Danish)
n. - teologi

Nederlands (Dutch)
godgeleerdheid

Français (French)
n. - théologie

Deutsch (German)
n. - Theologie

Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - (θρησκ.) θεολογία

Italiano (Italian)
teologia

Português (Portuguese)
n. - teologia (f)

Русский (Russian)
теология, богословие, теологическая система

Español (Spanish)
n. - teología

Svenska (Swedish)
n. - teologi

中文（简体）(Chinese (Simplified))
神学, 宗教理论, 宗教体系

中文（繁體）(Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 神學, 宗教理論, 宗教體系

한국어 (Korean)
n. - 신학, 신학 체계, 종교 심리학

日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 神学, 宗教理論, 宗教体系

idioms:

• liberation theology    解放神学

العربيه (Arabic)
‏(الاسم) نظام لاهوتي, الاهوت‏

עברית (Hebrew)
n. - ‮תורת האלוהות, תיאולוגיה, חקר דת הקשורה באלוהים (בייחוד הנוצרית), ניתוח שכלתני של האמונה הדתית‬

If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.

To select your translation preferences click here.