What is theology? Basically, theology is the study of God if one takes the word “theology” apart in its component parts. But more specifically theology is
“the discipline which strives to give a coherent statement of the doctrines of the Christian faith, based primarily upon the Scriptures, placed in the context of culture in general, worded in contemporary idiom, and related to the issues of life (Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 1st Edition, 21).”
This approach to base theology “primarily upon Scriptures” is understood as an inductive approach in that one initially studies the Scriptures. This approach is to “find” what is asserted in the text of Scripture about God, human beings, sin, salvation, etc. The theological task then becomes a deductive one in which truths are organized or deduced from the evidence studied (See Stafford, Theology for Disciples, 29ff).
How important is the study of Theology? Well, if Theology is the study of God and God’s self-revelation it would seem to be the most important study for one’s life. How is one to understand the nature of the God that rules over the entire universe and how is one to understand how to respond to such and live out such knowledge.
Roger Olson gives a cogent account of why Theology is an important endeavor. This endeavor is to be understood not only as important but critical to all who would claim to be Christian in their thinking and actions.
The critical task of theology is to examine messages claiming to be Christian, testing them according to the Word of God, tradition (the Great Tradition of what Christians have always believed, everywhere and at all times), reason (logic), and experience (the movement of the Holy Spirit among the people of God not overriding scripture but applying it and giving insight and wisdom collectively). https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2022/01/why-theology-matters/
It is in failure to understand theology in these two areas (nature of God & one’s response) that accounts for much of the confusion and error in The Church and Christian people today. And to discount this because one is simply a follower of Jesus is to fail to recognize that everyone is a theologian, it just remains in determining what kind of theologian is one.
Everyone is a theologian, either conscious or unconscious, in the sense that everyone has some conception of the nature of reality, of the demands of reality, and of those elements in reality that support or threaten meaningful existence. (James Luther Adams)
If everyone has ideas of God and reality then it seems reasonable to believe that everyone should give some attention to the notions of theology one possesses. Are these notions to be considered true. CS Lewis has some thoughts that help us here as he recognized years ago that our theological thoughts need attention.
“In other words, Theology is practical: especially now. In the old days, when there was less education and dissussion, perhaps it was possible to get on with a very few simple ideas about God. But it is not so now. Everyone reads, everyone hears things discussed. Consequently, if you do not listen to Theology, that will not mean that you have no ideas about God. It will mean that you have a lot of wrong ones — bad, muddled, out-of-date ideas. For a great many of the ideas about God which are trotted out as novelties to-day are simply the ones which real Theologians tried centuries ago and rejected.” ― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
In the tradition of The Church of God (Anderson) there was, early on, a practice of doctrinal or theological teaching from pulpits all across the United States. It is even instructive to note that one of The Church of God’s most honored teachers wrote a book called, Theology for Disciples (Gilbert Stafford). The very title suggests that theology is for disciples of Jesus and not some select group.
Finally, the great William Wilberforce, who was involved in ending chattel slavery in the United Kingdom reflects on the importance of theology or actually its absence in the lives of most members of The Church of England. If the nominal Christians of Britain are ignoring gross institutional wickedness like race-based chattel slavery, it is because their hearts are cold; and their hearts are cold because their heads are empty. What Dr. Wilberforce prescribes is a big dose of “the peculiar doctrines of Christianity:” not morality or piety in general, but the core doctrines which we only know from special divine revelation in Scripture (Sanders, Wesley and The Christian Life, 100).”
I think it is certainly valuable, if not critical, to consider how important a place and priority theology occupies in our lives and thinking. For this consideration I offer an image for your topic. This image to consider is that of a tree. This is because when one studies theology there is often a statement about the different “branches” of theology or Theological Method. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/theological-method/
These “branches” of theology are often referred to as Biblical Theology, Historical Theology, and Practical Theology. These designations are helpful to begin with but find much transfer in each. For instance, many would suggest that Biblical Theology is also a Practical Theology for life. In fact, John Wesley would often ask people who were follower’s of Jesus: “How is your doing?” (https://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=asburyjournal”).
We begin our consideration of a tree’s root system. The root system is what gives the tree the ability to transport necessary nutrients and moisture for the life of the tree. The roots also provide stability for the tree. This root system, for theology, is none other than the Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament Scriptures. Historic, orthodox teaching of theology has its basis in God’s self-revelation. Theology is the discipline that seeks to understand in a coherent and faithful reading of The Scriptures (Erickson’s thought). And although in this pursuit we may not know God completely we can know him sufficiently.
For historic, orthodox Christians the root system (The Scriptures) is the source and stability of any of the “branches” of theology. These “branches are sometimes referred to as Historical, Practical, or Systematic Theology. Admittedly there are other sub-categories of theology that occupy significant value (Old Testament Theology, New Testament Theology, Cannonical Theology, etc).
As to the origin or beginnings of Christian teaching one finds the compilation of stories about Jesus in what are called The Gospels and letters to groups of followers of Jesus by The Apostles. Theology or theological reflections certainly began with the teachers of Judaism. Their writings and theological reflections are found in The Mishnah and Talmud (Babylonian & Jerusalem). These writings and thoughts were attempts by Jewish leaders to understand Torah and how to live out the faith of the Hebrew Bible.
The origins of what we now call the study and composition of theology from the New Testament follows the same process of Jewish leaders as an attempt to understand the teaching of Jesus and the letters of the New Testament. This attempt is one of understanding correct beliefs (orthodoxy) and faithful practices (orthopraxy); “ortho” being the term that means “correct or straight.” We see this meaning in words like “orthodepdic” which is the branch of medicine dealing with the correction of deformities of bones or muscles (https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/orthopedic#:~:text=The%20word%20orthopedic%20comes%20from,bow%20legs%20or%20knock%2Dknees).
Furthermore, the construction of theological positions and beliefs seem also to be in response to views that were in error to the teachings of The Gospels, early creeds, and practices of the early followers of Jesus (Placher, History of Christian Theology, 44ff). The earliest of these creeds and statements are found in the Didache (1st century CE) and The Apostles Creed (2nd century CE). One also discovers in the history of theology seven ecumenical councils (4th to 8th century CE) that seek to establish orthodox theology for The Church around the world (https://www.theopedia.com/ecumenical-councils).
So, what is the history of this enterprise called Theology? The beginnings of this enterprise were attempts at articulating The Good News of God’s action in Jesus Christ that in some ways is so incredible that it is difficult to understand or believe. The result of this attempt was the Early creeds: Apostles Creed, Nicene and Athanasian Creed (Oden, Rebirth, 31). These were efforts to articulate orthodox views of the work of God in the world. These efforts began early in the life of The Church and were necessary as The Church of Jesus expanded to areas who had little or no knowledge of Israel and the promise of a Messiah.
It is actually in the serious discussions at Ecumenical Councils over the years where we come to the experience of formulating and adopting official//accepted doctrines about the life and person of Jesus Christ, Trinity, and the truth about salvation. It is also in the Ecumenical Councils where we discover what is often called The Great Tradition or the beliefs shared by all Christians. The result of the Ecumenical Councils united The Church in sharing consensual beliefs.
However, as one might expect, there came a time when disagreement occurred. These disagreements are what “created” two major branches of Christian Theology. These disagreements basically related to the locus of power and who had the place of power and authority over the entire church. At the time there was not only the bishop of Rome (who wold become The Pope of The Western, Roman Catholic Church) but patriarchs in other places of great influence (Ephesus, Alexandria, Jerusalem). In addition, there is a significant disagreement about the confession of The person of The Holy Spirit and the use of icons. (https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1901-2000/east-and-west-churches-reconcile-)
The Great Schism between what we call the “split” or division of the Western Church (Roman Catholic) and Easter Church (Orthodox) occurred as a result of brewing contentions listed previously. This “split” essentially over who was recognized as the location of power (Rome or Constantinople) and occurred in 1054 CE. One can suggest that the “split” finally came about because of many years of political struggling as to who had the right and authority to determine doctrine that culminated in a doctrinal disagreement over how to refer to The person of The Holy Spirit as being present in the world (filioque).
This disagreement as to the person of The Holy Spirit was a “watershed” event that had been “brewing” for centuries over the above mentioned matters. And it is this disagreement that and accounts for the presence of The Roman Catholic Church and The Eastern Orthodox Churches as they separated in doctrine and leadership.
(https://www.britannica.com/event/East-West-Schism-1054).
So, now The Church of Jesus is divided by different leaders (popes/partriarchs), different locations (Rome/Constantinople), and at least by a different confession of the procession of The Holy Spirit (from the father and son//from the father). These differences account for the presence of The West and East churches. This division lasted for 900 years when on December 7, 1965 the two were once again united by revoking the excommunication each imposed on the other. (https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1901-2000/east-and-west-churches-reconcile-)
Catholic vs. Roman Catholic
In The Apostles Creed we read: “I believe a holy catholic Church, the communion of saints.” The word “catholic” is a term that means universal. The creed is declaring a belief in the church that is universal and consists of all true believers. ((Side bar: This is surely the position of The Church of God (Anderson, IN) when we exclaim, “we reach our hands in fellowship to every blood-washed one.”)) The belief in the universal church is a deeply held belief in the early church and is one that our movement (CHOG) has affirmed from our inception.
The Roman Catholic Church refers as “an” expression of the Universal Church that adhere to certain practices and has a supreme leader in Rome, Italy. Roman Catholicism takes some shape as the leader of the Universal Church as the bishop of Rome takes a role of authority and precedence over all other leaders or bishops in the church universal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2wVTAKgTps). The bishop of Rome was the recognized leader of the church in Rome where the great witness of Peter and Paul had occurred. In addition, the bishop of Rome oversaw the church that was at the center of the Roman Empire and was the only Latin-speaking patriarch in the Latin-speaking world so it would follow that this leader was one of great prominence (The Story of The Creeds, 178).
Roman Catholic theology surely locates its essential doctrines in the ecumenical councils and teachings of early Christians. It also has the feature of accepting some level of grace that is synergistic in nature. This synergism might best be understood that people must cooperate with God’s gifts of grace in Word and Sacrament. The approach sees grace not only as a matter of pardon but empowering for living. (https://stbartholomewcclb.org/what-is-a-sacrament#:~:text=A%20sacrament%20is%20an%20external,body%20of%20Christ%2C%20the%20Church.
The Eastern Church: Orthodox
The Eastern Church calls itself The Orthodox Church because they did not accept the addition to the statement to the Holy Spirit proceeding “and from the Son” that was adopted after the unanimous view adopted at The Council of Nicea. The Western Church’s adding that The Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son, and not simply from the Father, was considered unacceptable to the Eastern Church and its leadership. This addition was not accepted because it was not at a council with unanimous approval that added this statement to the statement of Nicea (The Story of The Creeds, 183). This being the case there were also influential bishops in Alexandria, Ephesus, and Jerusalem. However, the early church seemed to gravitate to the bishop of Rome. This position developed into what is now the bishop of Rome known as The Pope.
The DIFFERENECES in Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy are that the Eastern Orthodox reject papal supremacy and centralized authority, acceptance of The Filioque controversy, reject Mary as being born without sin, the use of icons, a married priesthood, and the rejection of purgatory https://greekreporter.com/2023/04/01/catholic-church-orthodox-church-differences/
The Protestant Church
The emergence of what is known as The Protestant Church is what one might image from its name: a protest. Exactly what this movement in Christian history is protesting may depend on what leader of this enterprise one consults. Luther in Germany, Calvin in Geneva, Zwingli in Switzerland, Arminius in Holland, etc. Each of these leaders represent some differences as well as similarities in their understanding of salvation and life with God
All these leaders had in common that notion of breaking away from what they contended was a “works” righteousness of salvation taught by The Roman Catholic Church. The essential truth was that salvation was NOT something bestowed by The Roman Catholic Church but bestowed by The sovereign God because of faith exercised by the individual. Thus, the doctrine of “sola fide” or only faith because the “rallying cry” of the Reformation. No one could be right with God by works; one can only be right with God by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ. This is an essential dividing line that Protestant theologians affirm in their understanding of salvation.
There are surely other features shared by those of Protestant theology commitments. One of the central beliefs that is shared by all is the supremacy of Scripture over tradition and that all theology must finds its source in Scripture (McGrath, 66). This accounts for one of the “cries” of the Protestant Reformation was “sola scriptura.”
But there were differences that persisted even with the passing of Luther and Calvin. A major distinction was the Lutheran acceptance of The Lord’s Supper as the physical body and blood of Christ which was not accepted by every Protestant group or movement (The Story of The Creeds, 244-245).
Beyond this brief understanding of Protestant theology that is offered here was its reaction against the view of salvation held by The Roman Catholic Church. It is also necessary for one to account for the anabaptist (re-baptize) tradition. This began as a movement and became known by groups that taught that baptism was not for infants but for those who expressed personal, public faith in Jesus Christ, sometimes called “believer’s baptism (McGrath, 61). In general, the Church of God aligned with this practice of believer’s baptism in their Protestant beliefs.
If one were to attempt to categorize Protestant theological commitments one might suggest two. One would be associated with what is often referred to as Reformed theology in the teachings of John Calvin’s (and others) and what is understood as Arminian theology as prescribed by Jacob Arminius and others. These two leaders are most often associated with the two different views of election to salvation and perseverance in salvation.
Even though Arminius was trained by the successor of John Calvin in Geneva (Theodore Beza) to what is often referred to as High Calvinism and maintained several of the basic teachings he (and his subsequent followers) strongly denied unconditional reprobation (to be damned) and unconditional election (to be saved) (Olson, 14). This denial is the basis of the difference in Reformed and Arminian thought even though they share much in historic, orthodox Christian beliefs.
The church in which John Wesley was raised (Anglican) had some differences in how some viewed election overall. The official teaching of the Anglican Church is found in the Thirty-Nine Articles of religion. Article seventeen is the article that addresses election appears in only a positive sense of those who are saved. There is no mention as to how God elects and no mention if some are elected to damnation.
There is evidence that many of the Anglican Church had sympathy and shared sentiments squarely set with Arminius. In fact it is asserted that many of the Anglican clergy held that Article 17 did not support unconditional election and reprobation.
In England, at the time of the Synod of Dort, we also were much divided in our opinions concerning the controverted articles [the Five Articles of Remonstrance]; but our divines having taken the liberty to think and judge for themselves, and the civil government not interposing, it hath come to pass that, from that time to this, almost all persons here of any note for learning and abilities have bid adieu to Calvinism, have sided with the Remonstrants [the followers and successors of Arminius], and have left the Fatalists to follow their own opinions, and to rejoice (since they can rejoice) in a religious system, consisting of human creatures without liberty, doctrines without sense, faith without reason, and a God without mercy (The Works of Arminius, three volumes, “Testimonies from Various Authors,” trans. James and William Nichols (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 1:xli.
John Wesley’s theology takes shape in what some have called an Anglican Church in an Arminian England. John Wesley (1703-1791) likely is the most famous proponent of Arminian theology. Wesley held strongly to Reformed teaching of humanities total depravity that manifested itself in no ability nor inclination to submit to God’s rule (Romans 3:10-18). But Wesley, in accepting the total lack of human ability with respect to salvation also taught (as church fathers and Arminius taught) about an energized view of grace. This energized grace in Wesley’s theology might be understood as the presence of God working to make one aware of the need of God and then giving the ability to respond to God’s offer (Randy Maddox). This view makes careful work to affirm total depravity and inability of human beings to be able or have any interest in salvation (Romans 3:10) while revealing Gods gracious action in bringing people to salvation through grace and not human ingenuity.
Wesley’s (and many others) understood God’s grace to be the grace of pardon and the grace of power. Grace as pardon enabled Wesley to affirm the doctrine of total depravity and avoid the trap of legalism or thinking that one can “do” enough to be right with God. Pardon from God is the result of faith in God’s gracious offer of forgiveness in and through the work of Jesus Christ.
Grace as power enabled Wesley to avoid the trap of license for Christian living (Sanders, 99). Energized and empowering Grace enables one to cooperate with God and live a life that is honoring to God not simply forgiven by God. Albert Outler asserts that Wesley’s view of energized grace was so that the pardoned one could now participate in the life of God. Grace is “experienced as something more than mere forensic pardon. Rather, it is experiences as actual influence—God’s love, immanent and active in human life (John Wesley, Outler, 33).” But this grace should never be confused as some force or power; this grace is the activity of the gracious God of the universe throught the working of The blessed Holy Spirit to draw us to himself and THEN empowering us to participate in His life.
This view of energized Grace as God’s kindness is understood in initiating a relationship with human beings who are turned away from Him (Isa. 53:6). God’s grace is understood as initiated some understanding of himself through creation (Romans 1:19ff), as well as having placed some understanding of The Law on the hearts of every person (Romans 2:14-16). And certainly, God’s sending Jesus Christ into the world as the ultimate act of initiating or Prevenient Grace.
Prevenient Grace energizes a person to be able to respond to God’s presence in the world the message of the Gospel; one’s will is freed to respond through grace (Prevenient, Justifying and Saving Grace). Prevenient Grace as a universal reality is established by the consequence of the atonement and the unbounded ministry of The Holy Spirit (Crofford, Streams of Mercy, 94 qtd in Prevenient Grace, 159). So, any response by human beings is the result of God initiating work.
My thought about Prevenient Grace here is a humble image of someone going ahead of others marking out a trail. In some cases the marking out of a trail are on trees but another way where there are few trees is to mark out the trail with rock cairns. Rock carins are stacks of rocks that mark out the trail. These marking are that someone has come before to give guidance to future hikers who need to know the way to tread the path. God has left evidence of himself and the way to him. We call this grace; we call this Prevenient grace because it is to begin to mark the path to salvation.
The Church of God has historic roots and commitments in Wesleyan Theology as well as Pietism and Anabaptist groups. These roots and connections are related to a robust understanding of personal salvation. Gil Stafford asserts in his book Theology for Disciples (275) that salvation in The Apostle Paul’s teachings extend from the legal realm (justification) to the spiritual realm (sanctification).
This understanding of salvation is one that teaches the unity if all God’s children in a non-sectarian fellowship (Stafford, xxi). In addition, the teaching of sanctification/holiness as the work of God in the life of one who has experienced pardon for one’s sins that is the goal instead of simply being forgiven. In fact, in early teaching of The Church of God there was the clear assertion that holiness/sanctification could not grow in a sectarian environment (Heaton). This is one of the reasons for the early members of The Church Of God to “come out and be separate from the sectarian groups in which they had participated. Early Church of God leaders taught that holiness/sanctification finds its rootedness and environment to grow only in a place of unity. Identifying the exact nature of unity has been a challenge for each succeeding generation.
The Church of God commitment to holiness/sanctification in the practice of unity is directly in line with Wesley’s ecumenical spirit and understanding of salvation beyond an experience of forgiveness. Wesley wanted to cooperate with anyone and everyone who would cooperate to bring the Good News of Jesus Christ to others. But this cooperation was not simply to get along. Wesley had some strict beliefs that guided ministry. Wesley and Warner believed that the Scriptures attest to an ecumenical approach to the Christian life where faith in Jesus as Lord was normative. This does not mean, as Wesley stated (and as Warner would have similar sentiments), “a latitudinarian He famously stated to those who would have differences of opinion about worship and other matters: “If your heart is as my heart give me your hand (Wesley’s Sermon: Catholic in Spirit).” And in the same sermon he states that this catholic spirit is not speculative latitudinarianism. It is not an indifference to all opinions. But Wesley and the early leaders of The Church of God always saw “the church” as those who had been born of God and not because of denominational affiliation. So, Wesley and early Church of God leaders embraced all believers who had placed their trust in the completed work of Jesus Christ.
DS Warner and The Church of God align with Wesleyan Theology in what is at times called “full salvation:” justification and sanctification. In fact, Wesley thought that the teaching of Holiness was the “great depositum which God had lodged with the people called Methodist....and why He had raised them up (JW’s Teaching, Oden, vol, 2. 238). Wesley, as well as D.S. Warner, never considered that justification was the full experience of salvation; imputed righteousness at justification by faith enabled imparted righteousness in sanctification. So both Wesley and Warner had a view fuller view of salvation than simply an event where one “accepts” Jesus as one’s savior.
In fact, Wesley stated in a letter to Thomas Church that our main doctrines which include all the rest: Repentance, Faith, and Holiness. Repentance was the porch of religion, Faith was the door of religion and Holiness was the house of religion (Letter to Thomas Church, June 17, 1746, VI.4, Telford 2:268).” In other words the goal of the experience of forgiveness is a salvation that issues forth in holiness of life. ‘A way of understanding Wesley’s robust understanding of salvation was that he asserted that Justification by Faith is what God does FOR us and Sanctification by Faith is what God does IN us (Collins, The Theology of John Wesley: Holy Love and the Shape of Grace, 179).’
Wesley did in fact define in some sense what this “full salvation” looked like. His thoughts went along the line of Holiness//Sanctification which he defined as “perfect love.” Wesley states, “there is nothing higher in religion; there is, in effect, nothing else; if you look for anything but more love, you are looking wide of the mark (John Wesley’s Plain Account of Christian Perfection, Annotated Edition, page 217, Mark K. Olson).”
These 2 emphases of Wesley as to Catholic in spirit and Holiness are precisely the doctrinal fuel that propelled the early leaders of the Church of God. ‘The twin truths of unity and holiness are at the heart of the vision of The Church of God (Callen, Following The Light, 88).’ The early Church of God leaders were clearly in the Wesleyan “spirit” of these two theological commitments. Along with these commitments were other expressions of these commitments (church membership based upon conversion, action about social evils, fellowship with other groups of believers in Jesus, etc.)
These previously noted commitments of The Church of God and Wesley’s views are in line with what Kenneth Jones asserts are the marks of The Church. Jones asserts that the marks of Holiness, Catholicity, and Unity are the essential marks of a church (Jones, Theology of Holiness and Love, 264). And these essential marks are theological pillars for The Church of God over the decades. It is the hope of many that these theological pillars remain.
The Apostles Creed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABJr4yq9IlE
Theology For Disciples, Gilbert Stafford
https://robheaton.com/2011/02/10/ds-warner-and-sectarian-soil/
Christian Theology: An Introduction, Alister E. McGrath
Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities. Roger E. Olson
John Wesley’s Theology: Holy Love and The Shape of Grace, Kenneth J. Collins
John Wesley’s Plain Account of Christian Perfection, Annotated Edition, Mark K. Olson.
Following The Light, Barry Callen
Theology of Holiness and Love, Kenneth E. Jones
The Rebirth of Orthodoxy, Thomas C. Oden
Wesley on The Christian Life, Fred Sanders
The Optimism of Grace: How Grace Changes Everything. Cliff Sanders
The Great Schism (1054 CE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_s9Rcsg5UI
Justification understood by Luther and Roman Catholic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcT1EY6pP0w
John Wesley on Justification by Faith
http://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-sermons-of-john-wesley-1872-edition/sermon-5-justification-by-faith/
Catholic in Spirit, Sermon by John Wesley
Who Needs Theology?: An Invitation to the Study of God, Stanley Grenz & Roger Olson
John Wesley’s Teaching, 4 volumes, Thomas C. Oden
© 2024 School of Wesleyan Studies