Introduction to Theology

CHAPTER I

WHAT IS THEOLOGY?

    In this introductory chapter the basic questions about God, religion and theology are briefly explained as theology is mainly concerned with God and religion. This is followed by the various classical and contemporary definitions of theology and the creative polarities inherent in theologizing. The relationship of theology with other sciences will be also briefly examined. The chapter will be concluded with listing the different goals of theology. Every particular theological model has its own specific goal, in addition to the general goals of theology.

A.               THE GOD-QUESTION

Theology is generally understood as the discourse on God or God-talk. But in today's world of secularism, agnosticism and atheism, God's existence cannot be taken for granted. Does God exist? Even if God exists, can we know anything about God? Can we speak of God meaningfully as we speak about other subjects and objects?

1. The Existence of God

On the existence of God there are generally three views: Atheism, Agnosticism and Theism, though within each of these views there are innumerable schools and divisions of opinions. Atheism is a stance that rejects the existence of God. Among the atheists are included some of the philosophers, social scientists and psychologists, such as, Albert Camus, Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud. The reasons for the denial of God vary. According to some, there is so much evil, unmerited suffering and injustice in this world that one cannot believe in a good and loving God. Many of the atheists argue that God is the projection of the human mind created by religions and powerful groups by which they subdue the powerless and the poor. For psychologists like Freud", the God, who controls and provides everything, is created by the. human psyche in response to its need for love, safety and security. The Agnostics simply say that they do not know whether God exists or not. After all, for them the question of God's existence is not an, important one. With or without God, the world will go on as it is. It! must be noted here that even some of the religious traditions are non­ theistic, e.g. Charvakas of Hinduism and Theravada Buddhism. Theism is conceived differently by different religions and philosophical systems. Along with Christianity, Judaism and Islam speak about a personal God who is the origin and destiny of the universe and of the humankind. Some other religions and philosophical systems conceive an impersonal God, an Absolute Power, a Supreme Mind or Will or Spirit, a Pure Act (Actus purus), the Divine, the Sacred, a Higher Power. Whatever be the differences, God is conceived in Theism as the Ultimate Reality, the Ultimate Ground of Being, and the Ultimate Horizon of Meaning. The way God is conceived may be outdated, and some of the terms referring to God may have to be abandoned, but "an ultimate point of reference for grasping and interpreting human life and the world will always be needed in our quest for understanding aJ)d formulation" (Gordon D. KAUFMAN, An Essay on Theological Method, 1979). St. Thomas Aquinas gave five proofs for the existence of God. They are cosmological arguments, drawn from the cosmology of the time. From effects one is led to the cause and thus finally one arrives at the Ultimate Cause and the Prime Mover. These arguments may be I helpful to those who believe, but to the non-believers these proofs  seem to be not convincing. As Cardinal John Henry Newman had I correctly pointed out: these proofs are abstract and philosophical and they can only provide a 'convergence of diverse probabilities'. In principle, we can say that human person can come to the knowledge of God with the light of reason. "Our holy mother, the Church, holds and teaches that God, the first principle and last end of all things, can be known with certainty from the created world by the natural light of human reason (Vatican I, Dei Filius, no.2; Vatican II, Dei . It.' 3 Verbum, no.6). Without this capacity, man would not be able to welcome God's revelation. Man has this capacity because he is created 'in the image of God' (Gen.l, 27)"(Catechism of the Catholic Church. no. 36).

2. Can We Speak of God?

Even though God exists and we can know about his existence, can we speak about God meaningfully as he is ineffable, infinite and inexhaustible? The classical Hindu tradition says that we can only say what God is not: neti, neti. The mystical traditions and the classical Negative Theology too deny the possibility of positively speaking about God. But the biblical tradition and the mainline Christian tradition affirm that we can speak about God and we can have a positive understanding of God, though our knowledge of God

            is very limited.

"Since our knowledge of God is limited, our language about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking

creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our. limited human ways of knowing and thinking.

All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold -perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty - all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures' perfections as our starting point, 'for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator' (Wis.!3:5).

God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God - 'the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable' - with our human representations (Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Anaphora). Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God. Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that 'between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude' (Lateran Council IV); and that 'concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him' (St. Thomas Aquinas, SCG 1,30)"( Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 40- 43). In other words, human persons can have some knowledge of God, but their knowledge of God is limited. God is not an object to be experienced like other objects. Human persons cannot full comprehend the Mystery of God as it transcends human capacities. As God is the source and destiny of the whole creation, there is a certain similarity, though very imperfect between the Creator and the created. It is by studying the created world and its qualities and by eliminating its imperfections and limitations that we arrive at understanding of God and divine mysteries. The history and the realities of the time also influence human knowledge and perspective. All these mean that human knowledge of God and its articulation need continuous revision and reformulation.

3. The Knowledge of God as Analogical

This kind of knowledge of God is called in classical theology 'analogical knowledge'. 'Analogical' is contrasted with 'univocal" and 'equivocal'. Univocal means that a particular word or language is used with the same meaning. For God and creatures the same term or same language cannot be used with the same meaning because God belongs to the order of 'infinite' whereas the creatures belong to the order of 'finite'. There is infinite gulf between the two. So the language used for the created order cannot be predicated to God. Hence no theological language, or God-talk, in the univocal sense is possible. Equivocal means that the same word or language may be used for entirely different things with the consequence that they do not signify anything. Hence the only alternative is an analogical knowledge of God and an analogical way of talking about God. The whole theological enterprise is possible only with the role of analogy. The theory of analogy was developed by ristotle and further refined by the cholastic theologians, especially Thomas Aquinas. Analogy is used to explain the ontological relationship between the Creator and the created and for the possibility of knowing God by reason. 'Being' can be predicated in the proper sense, only to God, absolutely. But all 'beings' share or participate in the Being of God. Analogical predication is possible due to this participation of beings in God. If there is no such 'correspondence' between God and humans, we cannot know God. Jesus taught us to call God 'our Father'. This predication is neither univocal nor equivocal, but analogical. Purifying the concept of the earthly 'father' by removing all its imperfections and limitations, we apply it to God in an eminent way. In God perfection exists in total wholeness in an infinite manner. Creation is the expression of the love of God; it reflects the rays of God's perfection and beauty. Hence from the created order we can know something about God and we can speak of God.

4. God-Experience

If we want to speak of God, we must experience and know God in some way. The fact that humankind has some kind of God ­experience or religious experience is attested in human history in the various religious traditions among peoples of all nations and cultures of all times and all places. The reality of religion and religious experience is a very complex one, which has been the object of study by various sciences such as, history of religion, anthropology of religion, sociology of religion, psychology of religion, phenomenology of religion, philosophy of religion and theology of religion. Every one of these sciences deals with the subject of religion from its own particular point of view. They have their own differer definitions of religion and religious experience. Psycholog) phenomenology, philosophy and theology have identified differer types of religious experience (William JAMES, The Varieties ~ Religious Experience, ]902, Martin BUBER, I and Thou, 193i Rudolf OTTO, The Idea of the Holy, 1950). In general one ma~ define religious experience as that intimate and immediate awarenes' of being touched or grasped by the Divine. It is the experience an encounter with a tremendous and fascinating mystery (R.Otto) the experience of something very strange like the 'burning bush (Ex.3: 2-6), the experience of the glory and brightness of the Sun (Transfiguration episode, Mat.17: 1-13), the experience of heart burning (Emmaus experience, Lk. 24: 13-35). This experience can be expressed only in a symbolic, poetic and mythical language Hence God-talk or religious and theological language is not ordinar language. It is a language of its own. We may call it faith-languag and symbolic language. As God or Divine is totally the Othed absolutely incomprehensible and transcendent, God cannot be full understood, and God-experience cannot be articulated in ordinal' day-today language. "Theology uses ordinary language in a extraordinary way" (I.T.RAMSEY, Religious Language, 1957).

5. Religious Language as Symbolic Language

We have mentioned that religious language or God-talk is symbolic language. Human beings who are embodied can experieno the spiritual and transcendental reality of God only through thl medium of visible realities, which we call symbols, and it is only through symbols such experience can be further mediated. In th~ same way God encounters and communicates with us only through symbols. A religious symbol is the meeting-point between the human and the divine. God's self-disclosure and human response meet together in the symbol. The characteristics of religious symbols ma) be described as follows: They are pointers to something beyond themselves. They contain or participate in that to which they point Hence God is really what we call Him in faith language. Religious symbols cannot be artificially created. They function or cease tc function corresponding to their ability or inability to give expression to and to mediate for the human community t e reality which they to an          t to. Every religion IS a system or set of such symbols, Images, stories, narratives, belIefs an ntua s. t IS t e mutua participation

in these symbols, which gives coherence, unity, continuity and solidarity to the community. Two examples of symbols may be given: Jesus Christ is the supreme symbol of Christianity. In Jesus

the divine and the human met together and united in the supreme way. In the person of Jesus we find the fullness of God's revelation and the fullness of human response. In Jesus we meet God, experience God and he is the medium of God's self-communication or self-gift to humankind. Jesus Christ is the Sacrament of God. Jesus not only points to God, he is God-incarnate. Another example is the Eucharist, which is the sacrament and symbol of Christ's presence in the Church, in the Christian community. In the Eucharist the Christian believers meet Christ and experience Christ as the Eucharist is Christ, while at the same time it contains or participates in Christ; it is his Body. Christ's presence in the Christian community is expressed, experienced and mediated by the Eucharist. But Christ's presence in the Church and in the world is already there; it is a reality, even prior to the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the symbol of this presence. Christian theology does not start with proving God's existence and human being's capacity to know God and speak of God. One may call it 'natural theology. Christian theology, on the other hand, presupposes faith, and it is a faith-reflection. However, what we have discussed above provides a solid rational foundation to Christian theology. What we have said above establishes that God's revelation or God's self-communication and human response in faith are based on a strong philosophical and anthropological foundation. After all, God's revelation or self-gift reaches us only through our mind, reason, body and sense perception, either of the individual or of the community, mediated through symbols, and we can understand, express, articulate and mediate it only through symbols and by means of symbolic language. Hence, not only natural theology, but also Christian theology has a symbolic function.

B. VARIOUS DEFINITIONS OF CHRISTIAN

THEOLOGY

"By natural reason man can know God with certainty, on the basis of his works. But there is another order of knowledge, which man cannot possibly arrive at by his own powers: the order of divine revelation (Vatican I, Dei Filius). Through an utterly free decision, God has revealed himself and given himself to man. This he does by revealing the mystery, his plan of loving goodness, formed from all eternity in Christ, for the benefit of all men. God has fully revealed this plan by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no.50).

           

God creates, conserves and provides everything and from the created realities humans can know God. But from the very beginninJ God also revealed himself and invited humans to have intimate communion with him. "At various times in the past and in various different ways God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets; but in our own times, the last days, he has spoken to us through his SOl (Heb. I: 1-2). And humankind responded to God's invitation through faith. God's revelation and its counterpart, human faith, and the rational understanding constitute the subject matter of Christian theology. And yet, within this basic framework itself, there have be6 various understandings, emphases, and definitions of Christi I theology. The different definitions of theology derive from diver~ and different perspectives, such as, etymological origin: conventional usage in the past, ideological standpoints, differe:i systems and thought patterns and different goals and objectives.

1. Theologia

The term 'theology' derives from the Greek words, rheos (GOI and logos (word, discourse, science) which literally means, 'discour~ on God', 'science of God', 'God-talk' etc. Plato and his mastl Socrates (5-4 B.C.) used the term theologia to point out some of the statements  and discussions in the Greek poets on 'gods' in order to criticize them as unbefittmg divinebeings. aristotle used the term for his metaphysics or FJr~t I osop Y.' v: lIC, ex~ amed the whole of reality in terms of the Abso.lute ~nnclple or Supreme Mind' The Fathers of the Church, startmg with Clement of Alexandria and Origen, began t~ use ~he term 'the.ology' for the Trinitarian and Christological diScusSions of the time, and subsequently for the interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures. Christian theology in its beginnings was simply the study and interpretation of Sacred Scriptures. With the 'Scholastics' and the establishment of the system and institution of 'universities' theology became a specialized academic discipline along with arts, medicine and law. During this period theology meant the entire gamut of Christian doctrines and Scriptures and their rational and systematic explanations. The classical definition of theology derives from this period. It was the definition of St. Anselm, which is widely used by all even today.

2. Faith Seeking Understanding

        St. Anselm defined theology as fides quaerens intellectum, 'faith seeking understanding'. This definition is self-explanatory. By theological activity Christian faith tries to understand itself in rational terms. In other words, rational activity is called in to understand and explain faith. Hence theology is not a mere rational activity, not a human search or quest or investigation on God, based on reason alone, but a search to understand God's Words and action revealed in human history for the salvation of humankind. That is to say, theology is primarily an activity offaith; it is a science offaith. Faith­experience is the starting-point of theology. Theological activity can be carried out only with a living experience and practice of faith. On the one hand, it starts with faith, is guided by faith. and on the other hand, it enhances faith. Anselm would say therefore, credo ut intel/igam, 'I believe in order to understand'. Faith alone can lead to real understanding; God's Word alone can be the ultimate answer. Human intellect, left to itself, is unable to understand the mystery of God and his activity. Hence, practically speaking, the guidance for the theologian is the Word of God attested in Sacred Scripture and Tradition. Therefore, all discussions on God or religion will not fall into the category of theology. Philosophy of God, Philosophy of Religion, Sociology of Religion, Anthropology of Religion, Phenomenology of Religion, Psychology of Religion and simi sciences may deal with the Absolute Reality and religious experience. But they cannot be called theology, as they are not explicitly and formally guided by faith or God's revealed Word'. In other words their starting-point is not faith, but the empirical, observable scientific data and they draw conclusions according to the principles and norms of each of these sciences. In spite of the emphasis on faith, for Anselm and the Scholastics in general, theology also has a rational dimension. Human intellect and reason critically examine faith and its practice, analyze, organize explain, articulate and spell out its implications and consequences and apply them to life. Here reason is guided and enlightened faith in its understanding of the mysteries of faith, though not in any exhaustive way. Thus rational and critical activities save faith from falling into irrational superstition and dogmatism. Theological rational activities move spontaneously from faith-experience to expressions in doxology, witness, worship, beliefs, doctrines and other intellectual and rational articulations and elaborations. Fides Qua (believe in) implies and leads to fides quae (believe that). This  means that faith-experience or our response to the self-gift of God (fides qua) implies a rational content and involves consequences that need to be expressed or articulated in beliefs and doctrines (fi~ quae). The definition of Anselm tries to strike a balance between fideism and rationalism. Fideism accepts everything revealed by God without any attempt to scrutinize it by reason. Rationalism reject everything that is not clearly understood by reason. Avoiding both extremes, this is not clearly understood by reason. Avoiding both extremes , this understanding  holds that "theology's source and starting point must always be the word of God revealed in history while its final goal will be an understanding of that word, which increases with each passing generation. Yet, since God's word is Truth (cfr. John 17,17), the human search for truth – philosophy, pursued in keeping with its own rules - can only help to understand God's word better." (Fides et Ratio n. 73)

 This definition, 'faith seeking understanding', however, needs further refinement and clarification. What is the meaning of faith further here? It was very often understood as a set of truths and doctrines revealed by god and the task of theology was seen revealed Just to understand and to explain them, examine the relationship among these truths and

draw conclusions from those truths. But god revelation is primarily God's self-communication and the invitation to share God’s life and salvation, and not the mere revelation of a set of truths or doctrines. Faith is an existential attitude rooted in a fundamental option, which permeates the believer's whole existence in response to God's call and gift. By faith humans freely commit themselves entirely to God who reveals or gives Himself. Of course, free human response is inspired, moved and assisted by God's grace. God's grace is first (Vatican II, Dei Verbum, no.5). If faith involves an existential attitude and absolute commitment to God, and not merely a set of truths, then faith is never a finished product, just to be understood and handed over intact as something ready-made. Faith as an orientation, a fundamental option, an activity and commitment, is never perfect, but often feeble and lukewarm, and yet always dynamic. Faith needs growth and development. It must be also pointed out here that time and culture  always situate 'understanding'. A pilgrim character belongs to the very nature of the Church. The Church will be only gradually led to the fuller understanding of faith and to the fullness of truth. Hence the task of theology is not simply to hand over or to communicate a particular 'understanding' of faith, held at a particular point in history. The task of theology is a continuous 'seeking' for 'new understanding' of faith and its implications for life. Every new generation has to struggle and give an account of their faith in their Own times, 'an account we must give ourselves and others of the truth of our hope' (I Pet.3: 15). No one can ever resolve completely the tension between faith and reason, between theology and the mystery. This polarity is healthy and fruitful, and is the source of all theological creativity and newness.

3. Eastern Approach: Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi

The approach of the Eastern Churches to theology was quite different from the Scholastic approach of the West. The emperor Diocletian in the 4th century divided the Roman Empire into East and West, and with the sons of Theodosius I, East and West becal11l two empires and two different groups of Churches with their owi different customs, disciplines, liturgies and theologizing methods;

"In the investigation of revealed truth, East and West have used different methods and approaches in understanding and proclaiming divine things. It is hardly surprising then if sometimes one tradition has come nearer than the other to an apt appreciation of certain aspects of a revealed mystery, or has expressed them in a clearer manner. As a result these, various theological formulations are often to be considered as complementary rather than conflicting. With regard to the authentic theological traditions of the Orientals, we must recognize that they are admirably rooted in holy Scripture, fostered and given expression in liturgical life, and nourished by the living tradition of the Apostles and by the writings of the Fathers and spiritual authors of the East" (Vatican II, Unitatis Redintegratio, no. 17).

Western approach tb theology, as seen above, tended to be more rational, academic, abstract and philosophical, whereas the Eastern Approach was more Biblical, Patristic and Liturgical. Within the East itself there were differences between the Greek and the Syrian (See Chapter IV on the Different Models). Here we treat them together as part of one common Eastern tradition. In general, in the East theology and theological method was liturgy-centered, and it is expressed in the ancient dictum, lex orandi, lex credendi. It means 'law of praying is the law of believing’. Although it is not a definition; of theology as such, it aptly expresses the thrust of theology in the East.

We do not know exactly the details of the origin an development of this dictum. According to some scholars, this dictum originated in the 5th century, possibly coined by the monk, Prosper of Acquitaine. Theology is the understanding and explanation of God's Word and action: revealed in history, especially in Jesus Christ. The Christ-event IS proclaimed, celebrated and actualized in a very special way in the liturgy of the Church. Therefore, according to the Eastern view, liturgy is the living source of theology. Christian faith is celebrated and actualized at its highest point in the liturgy of the Church. Hence faith-reflection has to be naturally liturgy­ centred. Liturgical experience will be the unique source of theology, or liturgy, for the East, the main locus theologicus. God can be known, according to Easterners, not by any rational discourse, but by contemplation and intuitive knowledge. Western theology emphasizes more scientific, academic, systematic and rational understanding, using definitions and dogmas, whereas the Eastern theology is more mystical, contemplative, meditative, poetic and experiential. For the West, theology is more a science, whereas for the East, theology is an at:t and wisdom. In fact, the dictum, lex orandi lex credendi does not mean primarily a liturgy-centred theology or that liturgy shall be the norm of theology. It has a quite different meaning. It means that all the Christian beliefs and doctrines have their origin in the liturgy and prayers of the Church, and it is from liturgy that these doctrines were taken up by theology for discussion and clarification. The most elementary, primary, spontaneous and initial response of faith or faith-experience is in the forms of doxology, prayers, confessions and worship. Creeds originally were and even today primarily are confessions and proclamations of the believing Christian community, and they are not merely the list of fundamental articles of faith. They are not merely dogmatic and metaphysical statements. These proclamations and confessions developed and were formulated in the context of the liturgy or worship of the community. Hence the Christian beliefs, doctrines and dogmas have their origins in the prayers and liturgies of the Church, and this original context of do.ctrines must be kept in mind. Christian doctrines and dogmas are pnmarily confessional statements, and not merely metaphysical and 'dogmatic' statements. It seems that lex orandi lex credendi has to be  Interpreted along these lines.

Indeed, theological reflections must flow from faith-experience and liturgy is one of the primary sources or a unique source of faith experience. The Liturgy and the Sacraments not only express but all mediate the faith-experience. But the dictum can be used also in t reverse order: lex credendi lex orandi which would mean that "law of faith or belief is the law of prayer". It means that prayer and liturgies are the products of faith-experience. On the one hand the faith-experience expresses itself in forms of prayers and worship and on the other hand, prayers and liturgies mediate the faith experience. Liturgy also needs a strong theological foundation. Ie it falls into superstition and sheer emotionalism. Theological insight of the early Christian communities, their moral and intellectual attitudes, values and the socio-cultural realities of the time a~ reflected in the liturgies of the early Churches. Particular liturgy were also formed in particular historical and cultural contexts, at they should not be treated as perennial, unchangeable and finished products for all times. They need continuous reform as initiated the Second Vatican Council. They should also reflect the fait! Experience of today and they must be capable of mediating to authentic Christian experience to people today. Moreover, when we say that liturgy is the source of faith-experience and thus the locus theologicus, it is an invitation to make our liturgies real celebrations of faith-experience and thus to make them real sources of theological reflection, The East equally rejects a sterile liturgy lacking in faith experience. The source of theological reflection is the liturgy; experience, not merely any particular liturgical text or rubric however ancient they are.

4. Theology as Faith-Reflection on Reality

Scholastic theology, as it entered into universities and academic circles, led to speculative philosophical theology and ari intellectualism. The Protestant reformers reacted to this and propose the sola scriptura principle. Later, the Enlightenment an Rationalism dismissed all authorities, whether ‘Bible or the Church and theology became once again pure philosophical and ration discourse on God, human being and world. Romanticism emerged during this Period as a reaction to Rationalism, and reasserted the role of human experience. Christianity was seen not as a sharing in the religious experience of Christ. The task of theology was understood as identifying, analyzing and articulating this experience in order to draw its consequences for the life of the community. Romanticism stressed  ­the role of the individual in the community and for the community. Socialism and Marxism overemphasized society and community at the expense of the individual. !.he pendulum swung to the other side once again with Capitalism and some of the modern philosophies like Existentialism, which emphasized the person and the individual. The role of theology was perceived as 'the understanding' of the Reality of which humans are part and parcel. Political theologies and Liberation theologies emphasized the role of theology not mainly as 'understanding' the reality, but as 'changing' the reality with special focus on the society rather than on the individual. This historical perspective of the general theological scenario is, indeed, too simplistic. However, a few modern definitions of theology may be very briefly introduced in this overall historical background. Christian theology was never understood as an exclusive treatment on God. Thomas Aquinas had brought everything under the sun into theology, Theology used to discuss everything, including God, humankind and world; of course, everything from the perspective of faith or under the light of faith. Hence theology was generally understood as 'faith-reflection on real ity', With the emergence of the awareness of historical consciousness and the human character of all theological language, a theology 'from below' beginning with human experience was recommended to complement the theology 'from above', Within the anthropological and 'existentialistic' philosophical framework, Karl Rahner called theology 'Theological Anthropology'.

5. Theology as Theological Anthropology

Karl Raimer remarked that whatever we say about God says something about us, and whatever we say about ourselves says something about God. 'God and humanity are correlative terms'. " Soon as man is understood as the being who is absolute transcendent, in respect to God, 'anthropocentricity' ar 'theo centricity' in theology are not opposites but strictly one and tl same thing, seen from two sides" (K. RAHNER, Theologice Investigations, Volum~ 9, p.28). The object of theology is not Gc as such, but man as related to God. What theology discusses is God plan of human salvation as revealed by God. herefore theolof deals formally not with God, but witf human beings in relation God, their fundamental openness to God, about the mystery of God plan for human salvation. The God of theology is a God related 1 the humans, understood by them only because of their transcendent; Horizon. Theology, in fact, speaks more about humans than abo! God. Hence theology can be rightly understood as Theologic~ Anthropology. I 'Human bei,ngs' are not one theme among many in theology All theological questions are part of humanity's theologic, understanding of itself. Revelation is the revelation of the salvati, of humankind, not revelation of God in Himself. All questions 0. theology, Trinity, Christology etc have to be read and understood anthropologically, i.e. what is their meaning for the human person and human salvation? What are the roles and relations of the ThrPersons in God for human salvation? Christology cannot be conceived without the transcendental openness of human beings t God, their potentia oboedientialis for "hypostatic union". Similarly all theological topics have to be rightly seen from the anthropologic4! side. This is the 'theology from below' that is necessary for our tin!, so argued Rahner. Only such an understanding of theology and suctreatment of theology are acceptable to modern women and mel} They feel that many of the statements of theology are forms ~ mythology and are not to be taken seriously. Simply by appealing! to the 'mystery', which God has revealed is equally unacceptable, Theological statements are to be formulated in such a way that what is meant by them is to be connected to our own human self- understanding as manifested in our experience. Only then theology will become relevant and meaningful.

6. Theology as Critical Reflection on Christian Praxis

As we have indicated above, in the early centuries theology was just the meditation on the Sacred Scriptures and their interpretation. Its whole purpose was t 1e en ancement  sanctity, spiritual perfection, spiritual nourishment and contemplation. Here theology was viewed as Wisdom and IntUitive Knowledge rather than a rational reflection or rational knowledge. Although this sapiential and spiritual dimension of theology remains always one of its permanent characteristics, in our own times 'Liberation Theology' made a shift in the emphasis from knowledge and theory to 'praxis'. Gustavo Gutierrez defined "theology as a critical reflection on Christian praxis in the light of the Word" (A Theology of Liberation, 1974, pp.6-15). Theology has to deal with human beings and the realities of this world and not exclusively with the supernatural realities. The Church and all Christians have to be involved in the social, political and cultural movements of the time by reading the signs of the time and thus to be at the service of both the world and of the Kingdom of God. The Church is not to be centred upon itself, but upon the Kingdom of God. The Church has to 'find itself by 'loosing itself by living "the joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of men of this age"(Gaudium et Spes, no.l). Christian faith is, therefore, not simply a set of truths to be understood and formulated by theology, but it is the call for a praxis and commitment for the transformation of the world into the Kingdom of God. Theology is a critical reflection on Christian praxis. In this view, the emphasis is not merely on correct 'understanding' (orthodoxy), but on correct or right praxis (orthopraxis). Critical reflection on praxis means that the concrete life of faith and the historical praxis of faith in society, including economic, socio­ cultural, and political issues of life in the world, have to be critically examined in the light of the 'Word of God'. Theology has to oPen itself to the totality of human history and deal with the real issue, and questions of the modern world, and to respond to them. Sllc~ critical reflection must necessarily accompany concrete pastoral action in view of the total liberation of the whole of humankind frol1i all oppressive forces and structures. Such theology, linked to praxis. has a prophetic role, to interpret the historical events, revealing and proclaiming their profound meaning, challenging Christians for a radical and clear commitment to make this world a better place for all people. Such a 'liberation theology' is not a special branch of theology, but a new way of doing theology. It is a praxis-centered theology that does not stop with merely offering reflections and creating new understanding, but it becomes part of the whole process of transforming the world into a new, just and equitable society. which may be called 'this-side of the Kingdom of God' or 'the penultimate of the Kingdom of God'. For a critique of this approad see Chapter IV, section G.

7. Theology as Hermeneutics

The dominant characteristic of our time is historical consciousness, coupled with a dynamic concept of reality (GaudiuIII et Spes. no.5). Whatever is in history is contingent and is subjectea to change. Pluralism and change are, therefore, inevitable, and the) are the order of the day. This situation has, in fact, created a sense of insecurity, confusion and uncertainty of truth. Responses to sucn a situation can be many. Some may opt for nihilism, i.e. the truth can never be known. Others may have recourse to relativism, i.e., everything is equally true and false. Some others may swing bacK to traditionalism and fundamentalism. They wi II assert that their position and views alone are true and absolutely true, and they waill to impose it on others by all means. A fourth option is hermeneutics. namely, instead of repeating the past as absolute and unchangeable. it is interpreted and reinterpreted in constant dialogue with the changing realities. "The Church has the duty of scrutinizing the sigil\ of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel"(Gaudium et Spes. no.4). This interpretation is the main task of theology. In other words, theology may be also defined as hermeneutics. Theology is the interpretation of Christian faith in the contextcontemporary existentialrealities and the interpretationof contemporary realities in the light of the word of god.it is the interpretation of the meaning of human life and of the totality of human life and of the totality of reality in the light of the Gospel, and at the same tune It remterprets the Gospel and faith itself. On the one hand, the Gospel or Christian faith puts questions to the actual situation and, on the other hand, the present realities put questions to faith so that faith itself may be reinterpreted. The content of Christian faith needs continuous interpretation and re-interpretation, so that it may become understandable and relevant for every new age. Such interpretation or re-reading is needed both to distinguish between the core of the message and its historical and cultural expressions, and also to safeguard authentic faith. It is the task of theology to scrutinize, criticize and if necessary, to reform the Church's teachings, its understanding and formulations of faith and even to change its historical praxis. Theologizing is therefore an ongoing. Continuous process of hermeneutics or interpretation.

8. Theology as Interpretation of the Christian Story

Christian theology is not a theoretical and speculative system of thought or a set of doctrines. Rather, it begins with the Christian Story, the story of God's entry into human history, the story of God becoming man in Jesus Christ in order to save the whole of humankind from sin and death. This story is recorded in the Bible, especially in the New Testament and attested in Christian tradition. There are also other 'stories' among other peoples, nations and cultures, the Jewish story, the Hindu story, the Islamic story, the Buddhist story etc. By 'story' we do not mean here a mere imaginative creation by the human mind. God's entry into human history is not like other physical events; they are very special events that can be grasped only by 'faith', only by the human 'spirit" the ~spiritual faculty of the human person. God's revelation ~and action in history can be responded to by a human person only 111 'fait/ for which the initiative (grace) should come from God himself. So people prefer the term 'story' rather than 'faith', as faith is an abstact term, which may very often be misunderstood as 'a set of truths revealed by God and accepted by a human person. Human experience of the Divine can be expressed only in symbolic language, as I had mentioned elsewhere. Story, myth, narrative and poetry are part of this symbolic language. Thus the term 'story' (narrative, myth]  indicates the mystery aspect of the event or reality and its symbol character. Hence Christian theology may be also defined as t1 interpretation of the world and human life in the light of the 'Christian Story'. Some theologians prefer the term 'mythos"~ 'story', 'faith', 'narrative' and 'world-view'. According to this view the terms 'story' and 'narrative' are used also for non-sacral a ordinary events and imaginative creations. The terms, 'faith' an 'world-view' have an intellectualistic and privatistic bias. Hence the term 'mythos' is introduced. Mythos is used "to designate that of symbols, rituals, narratives and beliefs which taken together announce and mediate the presence and action of the Divine in tl life a community of persons" (Theodore W. JENNINGS, J Introduction to Theology, London SPCK, p. 2ft). Theology may \ thus defined as reflection upon Christian mythos. However, the ten 'mythos' can be misunderstood if not properly explained.

9. A working Definition of Theology.                    1

Drawing inspiration from the many defilations of theology given above, we would propose a working definition of theology as follows: Christian theology is a systematic and critical interpretation on the meaning of human life and reality in general from the perspective of the Revelation in Jesus Christ on the Other hand, and a reinterpretation of Christian Faith of the other, in the light of the new experience and context of the changing realities of the world, in and by the believing community.

           

It goes without saying that theological reflection and interpretation deal with the ultimate meaning and every of human life and of reality in its totality, including the human, the cosmic and the Divine, from the perspective of Christian revelation, as enshrined in the Bible and the Christian Tradition. On the other hand, in theological interpretation, Christian faith and praxis themselves are constantly challenged by the human sciences and scientific developments and new experiences derived from the changing realities of the world. It means that Christian faith itself, while maintaining a certain continuity, needs continuous reinterpretation, reformulation and reform both in theory and praxis. Finally the whole process of theologizing takes place within the believing Christian community, of course, led by the individual theologians and the authentic teachers of the Church or the Magisterium. Christian theology is not simply produced by the creative minds of individual theologians independent of the Christian community or the Church. Theologians are called to be the spokespersons of the community even in their prophetic criticism. Further elaboration of some of these points will be given later in the next chapter.

C. CREATIVE POLARITIES IN THEOLOGIZING

Theological activity has several inherent tensions, conflicts, struggles and dialectics or polarities. Theological activity is a committed one inspired by faith while at the same time it is a critical engagement. The real subject of theologizing is the Christian

community or the Church. However, individual theologians have creative role to play. Theologizing presupposes the identity and continuity of Christian faith on the one hand, but it calls for creativi1\ and change on the other. Christian theology and Catholic theology though they have their own identity, remain open. Though there is, common Catholic tradition and theology, admittedly Catholic theology is marked by enormous pluralism. All theologies are in the way contextual or influenced by the actual context. Theologizing in indeed, a rational activity and theology has to be intelligible however, theology has to safeguard and maintain the mystery of the Divine and divine revelation. The original faith-language in that Sacred Scriptures has a perennial value, though it calls for continuoul . reinterpretation and reformulation of its content. Christian theology) has to maintain orthodoxy, while at the same time orthopraxis seem! to have the primacy today. Theologizing activity entails a constant struggle between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Though theologizing activity is guided by the authentic Magisterium of the Church, the theologizing process should somehow include the perspectives of the laity, especially women, the poor, the exploited, the marginalized. The Dalits and the Tribal people, who have their own specific perspectives and views. In this sub-section we would like just the explicitate very briefly some of these questions, issues and dimensions of theology (See, Gerald 0' COLLINS, Fundamenal Theology, 1981, pp. 5-31) that are already implied in the various definitions of theology as presented above.

1. Mystery and Intelligibility

Both faith and reason have their own roles in theolog) However, theology distances itself equally both from Fideism all' Rationalism, and keeps the middle way, as we had mentioned above The content of revelation and faith can be rationally understood though in a limited way. The starting point of theology is not rational evidence, but faith-experience. But faith-experience and its original source in God's revelation can be received, responded to and understood, and hence it has a rational dimension. Both hUI11al reason and revelation have their original source in God. Hence there cannot be any radical opposition between the two. We have already seen that faith-language or theological language is a different kind of language; it is symbolic and poetic and its meaning should not be taken literally. The experience of the divine and supernatural realities can be expressed only in symbolic language. In theological reflections, therefore, there will be always a tension and dialectics between faith and reason, mystery and intelligibility. We can know and speak about God and the mystery of God's plan of human salvation, but what we know and speak about is not the whole truth; there is an underlying deeper mystery to which we can only point to.

2. Identity and Change

The problem of identity and change or continuity and change points to another inherent polarity and tension in theologizing. Christian theology has its own identity. God's revelation and human response are historical. God's revelation and human response takes place through particular events and persons in history. God's Word spoken through the Prophets and the Sacred Writers, as enshrined In the Scriptures, and in the historical events like the Exodus, Covenant, Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of Jesus, are such that they reveal God's plan of human salvation, and at the same time, every point to human responses at particular moments in history. Therefore, those events and persons and their words cannot be simply ignored or altered. The identity of Christian

theology consists mainly in the central fact of the Christ-event, its confession, proclamation and witness. By faithfulness to the ChriS! event, to the person, message and mission of Jesus, the identity and continuity of Christian faith and theology is maintained. However the Church needs continuous reform as it is in history. Its fail4 formulations, structures, disciplines, praxis and its understanding God's Word need continuous reform and reinterpretation. And Ih~ is the task of theology. Anchored in the Christian tradition and II memory, recorded in the inspired Word of the Sacred Scriptures, 141 Church has to become relevant in every age through theological interpretation and critical reflection on its historical praxis. Christi~ theology thus involves a creative tension between continuity an~ change.

3. Committed and Critical

Faith-experience is the starting-point of theology. Hence theologizing cannot be done without the living experience and practice of faith. Theologians must be committed to their faith. Non believers can be good scholars of religion or of history of theology; but they cannot be theologians. Theology is, therefore, a committed~ engagement, which means that theology is not a mere abstract speculative and academic discipline, but a practical discipline that challenges and changes our life. A theologian has to believe and livi what he teaches. However, theologizing is also a critical activity. I: is a critical activity because theology has to seriously examine ali Christian beliefs, traditions and practices with a critical mind in thl light of contemporary experience and knowledge, and evaluate, an~ if needed, challenge them and propose new understandings formulations and even new praxis. Hence personal commitment anti critical activity should go hand in hand, supporting and complementing each other.

4. Community and Individual Theologian

Christian faith is deposited or transmitted in a community .It is the community, which initiates the new members into faith; it is the community, which preserves, protects and interprets its faith individual theologians share in the faith of the community, though they have their own personal experience, Vision and charism. Hence Christian community is the realloeus theologieus, i.e. theologizing takes place within the community and on behalf of the community.

The Christian community is, however, a pilgrim community, conditioned by its own historical situation, and it needs continuous reform and renewal. Every reform and renewal is initiated by the inspiration and creativity of individuals who have a prophetic call or gift. The theologians in the Church do play this prophetic role. They bring in new ideas, take new initiatives and challenge the community in order to have new understandings, interpretations, formulations and new praxis.

Another major area of creative tension in theologizing is the relationship among the Magisterium or official teaching authority in the Church, theologians and the Christian community. All of them have their specific roles in theologizing. Their relationship of complementarity and healthy tension is one of the dynamic forces of the theologizing process. We shall take up this point in the next chapter, when we shall speak about the sources of theology.

5. One and Many, Transcendental and Historical

One versus many, universal versus particular, historical, social and contextual versus transcendental are other major areas of polarity or dialectics in theology. There is a core element or nucleus in Christian theology, which is the Christ-event. In addition to this, there are other commonalities among the various Christian traditions, like Sacred Scripture, the Sacraments of Baptism, Eucharist etc. Realities exist and they are true not only

'for me alone', but they have also, to some extent, a universal validity. Such common human experience is the basis for language and communication. This is the basis for a common theology. It Christianity there exists, however, various traditions OJ denominations, such as, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, ani Pentecostal etc. Each of these traditions has its own theology. Then is a Catholic theology, accepted by all the members of the Catholic Church: for example, a common theology, consisting of the official teachings of the Catholic Church is contained in the Catechism 0, the Catholic Church, the latest published in 1994. But within tht Catholic Church itself there had been and there are still variou~ schools of theology. Pluralism in Christian theology and Catholic theology is both theoretically and practically accepted. Theologizing! is thus a constant movement between the one and the many, the universal and the particular.   

6. Universal and Contextual

All theologies, for that matter all knowledge and its communication, are historically, socially and culturally situated.’ Although reality exists independent of us, we perceive it only through1 our mental constructs. It means that there is a distinction between reality as such and our understanding of it. The reality is mediated by concepts, meanings and symbols, which are produced by us according to our historical, social, cultural and psychological conditioning. The theology of Thomas Aquinas was considered for centuries as theologia perennis, a perennial theology, for the entire Catholic Church. But we must remember that the so-called perennial theology of Thomas Aquinas was an innovation in his time. He made a new and radical theological synthesis using the philosophy of Aristotle. In fact, his theological thinking was not acceptable to many, at that time. His books were burned by the Bishop of Paris soon after his death. Granted his outstanding contribution to the understanding I of the Christian Mystery, Aquinas' theology was also the product of his own time, conditioned by the medieval socio-cultural realities and the Aristotelian philosophical system. Hence no theology is, in fact, perennial. All theologies are contextual, i.e., conditioned by the social and cultural context. Even the Sacred Scriptures, historical and containing the Word of God, have a contextual, historical, cultural dimension. Biblical hermeneutics is, in fact, the attempt to sift and dIscern the Word of God or the message from the historical social and cultural forms and elements in the Bible.

      

       In addition to the various historical theologies and the various schools of theology through the centuries, today in our times, there are many well-known 'Contextual Theologies'. Some of them will be discussed in the chapter IV on 'Models of Theologizing'. We would like just to mention some of them here to highlight the pluralism and contextuality of theology. 'Liberation Theology' is one of them, which is an attempt to theologize in the context of the socio­economic and political realities of poverty, exploitation, and injustice. 'Feminist Theology' is theological reflection on the part of women in the context of their marginalization and inequality. 'Black Theology' is along the same line, theological reflection on the part of black people who are discriminated and segregated by white people with racial prejudice. The longings of the black people for liberation and justice are reflected in their theology. Sim ilarly 'Oalit Theology' is being developed in India to articulate the aspirations of the Oalits or the outcastes for freedom, justice and equality. Similarly, 'Tribal Theologies' are emerging today from the context of tribal people.

7. Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy

Orthodoxy versus Heterodoxy is another inherent tension in theologizing. Fidelity to the original and authentic Christian faith or orthodoxy has been always a perennial concern of theology. But unfortunately, orthodoxy was sometimes misconceived as simply repeating the traditional Christian doctrines and formulations. Any experience whether religious, aesthetic or poetic craves for its expression or articulation, in order that the experience may be mediated and communicated. But once it is articulated in any concrete form either in words or art or image, it becomes limited and very often inadequate to communicate or mediate the whole

experience in its entirety, especially to people in different contexts.Hence all such expressions and articulations need interpretation a reformulations. Heterodoxy was the opposite movement or tendency, which challenged and even rejected the traditional beliefs and faith formulations by introducing new theological trends and concept Although heterodoxy is to be condemned, however, it may contd new insights for doctrinal and theological developments and new faith-formulations and interpretations. For example, Martin Luthe J heterodox views like~ 'justification by faitth' and 'sola fide' paved the  way for a more integral understanding of faith. Historical! Development of theology and dogmas were often the result of Sl~ tension between orthodoxy and heterodoxy.

8. Orthodoxy and Orthopraxis

                                                                                               

A similar creative polarity exists in theology between Orthodoxy and Orthopraxis. Orthodoxy means correct doctrine its correct formulation and correct understanding. But to insist of on one correct formulation and only on one correct understand seems to be very difficult today in the context of the reality of theological pluralism. Due to the diversity in languages, culture thought patterns and philosophies, it is very difficult that  formulation and understanding gets acceptance among all people who live in different contexts. Hence any judgment to make one formulation or articulation or expression as the only orthodox  is very much questioned today, as it is seen in the domination a'~ imposition of one culture, language and thought pattern over the  others. In such a situation orthopraxis is given a certain primacy some contemporary theologies. After all, according to this Christian faith should be concerned also with praxis. the correct or right doing in order to change the world and society. Therefore, eq1 importance is given to praxis and change as to orthodoxy. This points to the inherent tension between 'theory' and 'practice'. All theories are tested by practice. Theories are changed when they becol' inadequate and impractical. But practice also changes at t\ emergence of new theories. Hence there is a dialectical relationsl~ and tension between theory and practice. Theory questions a'i challenges practice on the one hand, and practice challenges at questions the theories, .on the other hand. The same may be said about the relation and polarity between orthodoxy and orthopraxis.

D. THEOLOGY AND OTHER SCIENCES

Science (scientia) means knowledge, a system of clear, precise and valid knowledge. There are many sciences or scientific disciplines. Physics, chemistry, geology, biology etc: are called natural sciences. Then, there are the so-called human Sciences, such ~ropology, sociology, psychology, economics, politics et~. Philoso h is yet another discipline. Religious sciences form another category, such as, history of religion, sociology of religion, psychology of religion, phenomenology of religion, philosophy of religion etc. Theology may be also called a science. It is the systematic study of Christian faith, or the science of Christian faith. Similarly there are sciences of Jewish faith, Hindu faith, Islamic faith etc. In all these different sciences, the meaning of 'science' is not exactly the same. such science has its own concept of science, its own method, principles and system. The term 'science' can be used for any discipline, which has an object or area of study, method, principles, unity and systematization.

1. Theology as a Science

Christian Theology can be called a science, as it deals with the christian fuith, the study of its content, its implications for life an,d ~s interpretation in a systematic way, With its own methodology and ElI1clples. In Christian theology God's revelation given to human persons and received in faith is rationally or reasonably understood, explained, its meaning for life interpreted in a coherent manner and applied to actual life in community. Hence theology can be called a science and it is a human and rational discipline with a consistent language, meaning and method.

2. Relationship among Sciences

How is Christian theology related to other scientific disciplines? First of all, all sciences explain one and the same reality, but from diff erent perspectives, from the point of view of each science. Hence

naturally, we need all sciences to understand and explain reality in  a comprehensive and coherent way. Secondly, all truth and reality come from God. Therefore reality and our knowledge about it, form an integral whole, and they have a certain ontological coherence whether we know it or not. Thirdly, it is the same human mind and intellect, which tries to understand reality, and inevitably, the human mind will attempt to integrate every branch of knowledge into a. whole in a coherent manner. Therefore, all sciences are related to one another in the unity of human consciousness. The natural conclusion is that no science can work in an exclusive way, but all sciences have to be related to one another, while respecting the legitimate autonomy of each science. The claim of absolutism on the part of individual sciences is rejected today. Each science today, realizes its limitation and has become aware of the mystery of reality; of life, especially the mystery of human life and of this universe.

3. Theology and Philosophy

Biblical theologies, spiritual and mystical t!leologies, and some of the early Oriental theologies like that of the Syrian Fathers, were more poetic, narrative and symbolic in type or style. But gradually due to the close similarity between philosophy and theology, philosophical categories and systems were more and more used to express, articulate and communicate the Christian faith, especially beginning with the Greek Fathers, as we have indicated above. Thus Christian theology in the West became mainly 'philosophical theology'. Philosophy was called the 'handmaid of theology' (ancil/a theologiae). Both philosophy and theology deal with the ultimate questions, namely, the ultimate meaning of human life and of the world. Hence both are very much related. There is no one philosophy. but many philosophies, with different starting points, categories. methods and systems. Each philosophy organizes and interprets the data of human experience in the light of some key-category or organizing principle, such as, matter, nature, life, organism, process. energy, mind, spirit etc. This key-category is chosen by the philosopher by his/her own choice or intuition or experience, and the first task of the philosopher is to explain the key-category as the basis of his/her system (Owen C. THOMAS, Jl1trif,ucfian to Theology, 1989, p.5). In all philosophies reason alone is the guiding principle. But theology while dealing with the same ultimate p uestions is guided by the revealed Word of God and faith. Hence the source of theology and its approach are quite different from that of philosophy. But for understanding, explaining and interpreting the Christian faith, any philosophical category or system can be used with its own strength and weakness. However, theology need not depend on anyone particular philosophy as an exclusive medium of communication of faith. Some of the Fathers of the Church like Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Augustine and Bonaventure used Platonic and Neo-Platonic philosophy to explain and communicate Christian faith. For example, the Platonic philosophy of 'logos' was used to explain the Christian doctrine of creation, incarnation and redemption. Other medieval scholastics like Thomas Aquinas, Albel1 the Great and others used Aristotelian philosophy for explaining Christian faith. For exam p Ie, categories of' nature' and' person' were used to understand and explain Christology, the union of divinity and humanity in Christ. Some modern theologians like Rudolf Bultmann, Karl Raimer and others used Existentialist philosophy for understanding, explaining and interpreting Christian faith. A clear example is Christian anthropology in existentialist categories. Similarly some Indian theologians like Brahmabandab Upadhyaya, Swam i Abh ish iktananda, Raim undo Pann ikar and others made attempts to use Indian philosophical systems like the Vedanta for theologizing in India. The understanding of the Christian Trinity in terms of Saccidananda is just one example.

4. Theology and Social Sciences

Traditional theologies in the West used mainly philosophical categories and systems to explain the mysteries of faith, and thus constructed speculative theological systems in order to 'understand' reality and to explain the ultimate meaning of reality and human life. Their emphasis was on 'understanding the meaning of life and reality'. The contemporary contextual theologies, such as, Political Theology, Theology of Hope, and Liberation Theology, on the other hand, began to use social sciences, their categories and methods of analysis _the theologizing process and activity. Human and social   sciences, such as, sociology, anthropology, psychology, economics and politics study the human phenomena, both individual and Social from different perspectives and by using different methods. The Studies by these various sciences and their results, though partial, are really complementary. They contribute to human self-understanding. These sciences have enormous bearing on theology) Theological reflections should take into consideration the data and findings of these sciences. The contemporary contextual theologies, especially Liberation Theology, made a departure and used mainly the social sciences a1 the tool of theologizing. For, the main objective of Liberation! Theology was not simply to 'understand reality', but to ‘transform reality’. In order to transform reality, they started with the 'analysis’ of the situation or reality, for which they used the social science such as, sociology, anthropology, economics, politics etc. Critical reflections on the basis of the Word of God were followed in order' to inspire, support and mobilize the social process of change. The! in Liberation Theology the social sciences played a very significan role. 5. Theology and Religious Sciences Christian theology can also use the results and findings (j 'religious sciences', such as, sociology of religion, anthropology O religion, psychology of religion, phenomenology of religion et. These sciences study the religious phenomena from an empiric' point of view, from the particular point of view of each science] analyze them, examine their structures and explain how they function and their role in the lives of individuals and society. Christian theology can use the findings and results .of these sciences for tl1 scientific analysis of theological data and for their comprehensive interpretation. Even the discoveries of natural sciences an' developments of technology can contribute to theological reflection No area of human experience can be excluded from theological reflection. Theology, therefore, needs today an interdisciplinary methodology in order to fully understand reality and to draw insight and inspiration from all sciences and disciplines. Theology does not interfere with the internal laws and consistencies of other sciences and it does not make any judgment on them, but remains open to all sciences and disciplines. However, there cannot be really any opposition between theology and other disciplines. "Methodological research in all the branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a  truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God, in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are" (Vatican II. Gaudium et Spes, no.36).

E. GOALS OF THEOLOGIZING

The various definitions of theology given above, in this chapter, have already shown that they have a different emphasis with regard to the goals of theology. In the definition of theology as 'faith seeking understanding', the specific goal of theology was understanding the mysteries of faith and understanding the meaning of life and of this world. Awakening the faith-experience or encountering the Divine and thus enhancing our divinization or holiness were the main goals of theology in the formula of lex orandi, lex credendi. In the notion of theology as theological anthropology the goal of theology is conceived as authentic human existence by the right understanding of the human person in relation to God and to other humans and to the entire universe. In liberation theology's understanding, the goal of theologizing is to transform the social reality and human society. In the different methods and models of theologizing, the goals also are different, especially in their emphasis. (see, Chapter IV). However, at the very outset of this discussion on the goals of theologizing, we would like to affirm that the different goals of theologizing belong together; they are complementary and they cannot be strictly separated. The theology of the early Fathers of the Church, both apostolic and post-apostolic, was apologetic and polemical. They wanted to defend and protect the Apostolic faith against the attacks both from within by the heretics and from outside by the enemies and opponen. of Christianity. In the process, they also explained the faith, its conten its implications and pastoral applications. Later, theology was directe to catechesis, instruction and faith-formation. The medieval period in the context of the universities and academic studies saw thG emergence of speculative and philosophical theologies. But understanding the mysteries of faith or the divine plan of JUlina) salvation and promotion of authentic human existence and salvatio11 both of individuals and of human community were always integral parts of the goal of theology. The contemporary contextual theologid are responses to the specific problems like injustice to the poor discrimination of the women, the dalits, the tribals etc. Their goals were restoration of justice to all, abolition of inequality, discrimination promotion of freedom for all and the establishment of the Kingdom of God. With this general introduction on the goals of theology, we would like just to list the different goals of theologizing.

1.      The origin and core of Christianity is the Christ-event and the Christ-experience. It was the Christ-experience, which held together the disciples of Christ, gave existence to the Christian community and constituted the Christian faith. In Jesus Christ they saw the face of God and in him they found their saviour and salvation. This faith-experience is transmitted from generation to generation by the Church through the mediation of Scriptures, tradition, worship, liturgy, prayers, doctrines, beliefs, disciplines, catechesis and by their rational as well as symbolic articulations in theology. Theology's primary task is, therefore, to awaken, strengthen and communicate the faith-experience.     

2.      Theology also explains, analyses, elaborates and systematizes the faith and thus helps to understand and assimilate it better and better. Every experience naturally tends to its expression and articulation by which the experience is understood rationally and deepened. This is also true with regard to faith-experience. The continuous process of theologizing and theological articulation lead to a better understanding of faith-experience. But all understanding of faith is situated in history and culture, and thus also has a dimension, which is contingent and provisional. Hence theologizing is an ongoing and continuous process, which leads to ever new understanding of faith.

3.      The Word of God or God's revelation is always communicated  by the human word. Hence the Scriptures are both the Word of God and a human word. It is the task of theology to sift the human words in the Bible and to discover within them and beyond them the real Word of God. Theology thus interprets the Scriptures and unveils the Word of God and its message for us today. Theology can do this only in the context of contemporary realities and experience of today. One of the important goals of theologizing is, therefore, to understand the Word of God and its authentic meaning and implications for life today.

4.      Theology has both an interpretative and prophetic role. It has to help the Church in its process of discernment as regards the practices of the Christian community. In short, one of the goals or objectives of theology is to make the faith relevant and meaningful for today.

5.      One of the primary roles of theology is the systematic exposition  of the Christian faith showing its unity and the interconnectedness of its constituent elements. Ordinary believers perceive the unity of faith and its various elements by an intuition. Theology shows the unity and coherence of faith by deeper analysis, by moving from the centre to the periphery and from the periphery back to the centre. As we had pointed out elsewhere, the truth of one element of faith is shown by its coherence with the other elements of faith and with the whole. The truth of each doctrine and dogma manifests itself when it is integrally and meaningfully related with the other doctrines and the Christian faith as a whole. As Vatican II proposed, there exists a 'hierarchy of truths' among the various truths of revelation and their doctrinal formulations: "When comparing doctrines they (Catholic Theologians) should remember that in Catholic teaching there exists an order or 'hierarchy' of truths,since they vary in their relationship to the foundation of the Christian faith"(Vatican II. Decree on Ecumenism, no.11). This foundation of the Christian faith is 'the Mystery of Christ' and salvation in Christ. The importance or significance of a particular doctrine or truth depends on its specific relationship to the mystery of Christ and salvation in Christ. It is the task and goal of theology to show this relationship to the core or foundation and its coherence to the whole.

6.      The pastoral role of strengthening the faith and empowering Christian life is another impol1ant goal of theology. Theologians are to be believers, men and women of deep faith, and they should exercise their role of theologizing with great responsibility. They should not be involved in sterile criticism and irresponsible ways of theologizing. Their role is both pastoral and prophetic. Theological creativity should be coupled with the pastoral responsibility to the community and fidelity to the original and authentic Christian faith. All theologizing is to protect, safeguard, deepen and strengthen the faith of ordinary Christian believers. The ultimate role of faith is to transform the lives of individual persons by responding to the divine call and awakening each person to the presence of the Divine within and leading everyone thus to the real inner self in communion with God in Jesus Christ.

7.      The pastoral responsibility of theology is not only to individual Christians, but also to the Church as a whole and to the mission and witness of the Church. The Church is what it is and it lives by its mission. The Church, as the fellowship of Jesus' disciples, is sent into the world to witness to Christ, to proclaim the Gospel and thus to continue Jesus' mission. Theologizing activity has the task and goal of enhancing the mission of the Church. A theology, which is not oriented to the mission of the Church or one that has no witnessing value, is not worth the name. All the same, to clarify the very concept and practice of the mission for every new age is an equally important task of theology.

8.      The goal of the theologizing is not only the transformation of individual ChrIstians and the renewal or reform of the Church, but also the transformation of the whole world into the Kingdom of God. Jesus preached the coming of the Kingdom of God and the mission he entrusted to his disciples is the proclamation and the realization of the Kingdom. The Kingdom of God will be realized on this earth, though not in its full and final form, when the whole humankind will be able to live together as one community or a 'Community of communities' based on the values of the Kingdom, that is, with the values of love, justice, peace, equality and harmony. The final goal of theologizing is to enhance, promote and realize the Kingdom of God on this earth and beyond it. We conclude this treatment on the goals of theologizing with the affirmation once again that these different goals shall not be looked upon as separate or unrelated. All of them are closely related to one another, one complementing the other. All the same, a particular method oftheologizinr, in a particular context may have to emphasize one specific goal more than. others.

Questions for Review

            (1) Is Theology only a discourse on God, or a discourse on the

meaning of being human, or is it both?

(2) Why do we have several definitions of Theology? Among the

            many definitions given here, which do you prefer, and why?

(3) Why does theologizing involve a set of polarities? What,

            according to you, underlies these polarities?

            (4) Does Theology depend on other sciences? If so, is there not a

            danger of relativism in theology?

            (5) What are the different goals of theologizing? Could you classify

            these goals in the order of your priority?

List of Selected Books

            ALSZEGHY, Zoltan & FLICK, Maurizio, IntroductOlY Theology, (London: Sheed and Ward, 1982).

DUNN, Edmund J., What is Theology, (Mystic: Twenty-Third Publications, 1998).

JENNINGS, Theodore, Introduction to Theology, (London: SPCK, 1976).

JOHN PAUL II, Fides et Ratio, (Encyclical, Vatican, 1998).

LA TOURELLE, Rene, Theology: Science of Salvatio/J, (New Yark: Alba House, 1969).

McGRATH, Alister E., Christian Theology: An Introduction, (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001).

NICHOLS, Aidan, The Shape of Catholic Theology: An Introduction to its Source, Principles and History, (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1991).

O'COLLlNS, Gerald, Fundamental Theology, (London: DL T, 1981).

PAILlN, David, The Anthropological Character of Theology,(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).

SEGUNDO, Juan Luis, Faith and Ideologies. (New York: Orbis Books, 1984).

CHAPTER II

THE SOURCES OF THEOLOGY

After having described what theology is, in the present chapter we are reflecting on the sources of theology. If theology is the interpretation of faith or the Word of God in the context of the contemporary realities and vice-versa, what are the sources of faith and the Word of God? What is the source of Christian revelation? We begin this chapter by underlining the foundations of theology, i.e., faith and revelation. It will be followed by a brief history of the debate on the sources of theology. There are several kinds of sources for theology. The primary source of theology is the faith experience of the early Christian community as Sacred Scripture the entire' tradition embodied in the liturgy and the sacraments, the creeds and the teachings of the Church, especially of the apostolic Fathers etc. God's word revealed in the whole of creation and in the entire history of humankind and in the lives, cultures, and religions of all peoples should be also attended to as resources of theology.

A. FOUNDATIONS OF THEOLOGY

The foundations of Christian theology are Faith and Revelation. We have seen in the previous chapter that the starting point of theology is faith-experience, and that theology is the understanding and interpretation of the faith-experience. Christianity began with the Abba experience of Jesus Christ and the experience of the disciples of Jesus who found in Jesus their God and Savior. This faith experience presupposes God's revelation in Jesus Christ directed towards humankind in view of human salvation. Thus Faith and revelation, though they are distinct, cannot be separated. Revelation is God's self-communication, which can be realized or terminated only when it is received and responded to by human persons in faith. Hence Faith and Revelation are two sides of the same process, and they are the foundations of theology.

1. Faith

The attitude of faith is a universal human phenomenon. Every human person has some sort of faith, whether they are aware of it or not. The human person is a free and spiritual being who realizes himself/herself by one's own decisions and actions in history. Human experience shows that no finite object can really or ultimately satisfy the human quest. In every decision and action every human person in the quest for final self-realization or ultimate salvation tends to the infinite and transcendent, whatever way they may conceive it. This transcendental object or supreme value or ultimate meaning to which a person clings and which guides and inspires our whole life and action, and to whjch we have an absolute commitment, can be called 'faith'. Paul Tillich, the famous Protestant theologian, in his book, Dynamics of Faith (1958) defined faith as 'ultimate concern'. the state of being ultimately concerned. We are concerned with so many things, physical health, food, occupation, family, friends, spiritual goods etc. But what proceeds from the center of our being and what absorbs the energy of our whole heart and mind may be called 'ultimate concern'. It is true that people can make passing values their 'gods'. A person may not be even explicitly aware of their faith or ultimate concern. The object of faith may be varied aCC0rding to persons and communities, and one can discuss what kind of faith is more relevant or meaningful or worthy of absolute commitment. Abraham is called the 'father of faith', "the father of all who believe"(Rom 4:3). "By faith, Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go"(Heb II :8; cf. Gen 12:1-4). By faith he lived as a stranger and pilgrim in the Promised Land, and by faith he offered his only son in sacrifice. Three major religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, share the faith of Abraham. Here faith means obedience to God's word and deep commitment to God's call. It is faith in God's activity in history) God can be experienced in the world and in history. It is the deep conviction that God is present in history leading his people to freedom. This conviction can overcome all obstacles in our lives and provide us great courage and confidence. In the midst of failures, catastrophes and utter hopelessness this conviction can give us new hope and inspire us to make new beginnings. Amidst sin and death, faith will give us strength, serenity and peace to set out towards the unknown future trusting absolutely in God.

Christian faith has its own specificity and uniqueness. It is 'faith in Jesus Christ' that in him God has fully manifested and spoken definitively. In Jesus not only God revealed himself, but also in him God has revealed what a human person and humanity is. In Jesus God revealed his plan of human salvation and the way to establish the 'Kingdom of God', i.e. liberation here on earth and eternal salvation hereafter. According to Christian faith Jesus Christ is 'Word of God-incarnate' who by his incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection inaugurated the Kingdom of God, showed and effected human salvation. In Jesus Christ the promises made to Abraham and Israel were fulfilled, and salvation is now offered to all peoples and nations. Jesus still abides in the world, especially in the Christian community or the Church and guides both the Church and the world through his Spirit. God's decisive and definitive action in Jesus Christ in history and his abiding presence ~nd action here and now gives confidence to the Christian bel iever to face all challenges both personal and societal. Christian faith is the total response and commitment of the whole person to God as revealed in Jesus Christ. It is not merely the intellectual acceptance of some truths revealed by God or taught by Christ. All the same, faith has its rational, cognitive, ethical, mystical and emotional and other dimensions, which are expressed in various ways, in creeds, beliefs, dogmas, rites and rituals, moral behavior and codes of conduct etc. Hence faith and beliefs are not the same. Beliefs are doctrines, which are the rational and cognitive dimensions and conceptual expressions of the content of faith. Any Conceptualization of faith will be in a sense one-sided, partial, limited, inadequate and imperfect. Hence in the conceptualization of faith in beliefs and doctrines, while there are aspects of truth, there can be changes, development and pluralism according to time, culture and categories of thought patterns. Hence, in the course of the history of Christianity, there has been clear dogmatic development. There is one Christ and one faith in Christ, but there have been different Christologies. There is one and the same faith in the salvation given by Christ, but there had been different soteriologies. There has been one and the same faith in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but there have been different doctrines and theories to explain it. It means that one and the same faith can be expressed in different beliefs and doctrines; faith may be one, but beliefs and doctrines can be, to some extent, different and diversified. Although beliefs and doctrines are partial and inadequate, they are necessary fo~ understanding, communicating, stimulating and mediating faith. So we cannot dismiss beliefs and doctrines as unimportalit. Theology, as we have seen in chapter one, functions in this realm of conceptualization and rational reflection on faith. Naturally, theology is not identified with faith. Theology only makes an attempt to understand and justify faith and applies it to life. Can there be changes in the unrstanding and elaboration/of faith? First of all, if faith is a personal relationship and comm itment to God, there can be differences and changes in its depth and intensity on the part of any human person, especially in the course of one's physical, psychic and mental development. We are reminded here of the faith development theories of Piaget, Eriksson, Fowler and others who have tried to classify the stages in the development of faith and its different patterns in the lives of human individuals. Secondly, with regard to the content of faith and its understanding and expression there will be differences according to time, history, culture and the thought patterns. Thirdly, faith itself is a perilous journey between faith and unfaith, belief and unbelief in one's own life. Often our faith is challenged and questioned by doubts in every new situation and experience. In fact, doubt can help deepen any faith that is living and growing; it clarifies and consolidates faith. Fourthly, if faith is a personal relationship and commitment, there is need of passing from conventional faith to real faith. Children receive faith from their parents and community, and it is only gradually they personality appropriate and make it personal. In Europe today many People can only be called 'Christian'; they are just baptized, receive ~rst communion are married and buried in the Church. Many do not have any personal faith. This phenomenon is often called 'Cultural Christianity'. From cultural Christianity one has to change oneself to personal Christianity. Faith is not merely the assent of the intellect to a set of truths; it is a personal encounter and experience, which transforms the whole person. We see this from the lives of those who have really encountered Jesus. Their total lives were radically changed by the love of God and the love of neighbor. Faith is to be manifested in life, action, praxis, and ethical life. The New Testament has ample references to this. Love of God has to be manifested in the love of the neighbor. Faith is to be manifested in one's behavior, not in what one says, but in what one does. Liberation theology has emphasized this point. Theology's task, according to them, is not merely understanding reality but changing or transforming it. Jon Sobrino has put it beautifully as follows: "To know the truth is to do the truth; to know Jesus is to follow Jesus". Above all, faith is a free gift of God. "When St. Peter confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son ofthe Living God, Jesus declared to him that this revelation did not come 'from flesh and blood' but from 'my Father who is in heaven ", (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 153). But we receive it normally through our parents and community, the Church. The Church sustains, nourishes and hands over the faith entrusted to it. But faith is never imposed upon anybody. It is to be received as a human free act. It is a free response to God's self gift. Faith, therefore, implies and anticipates God's revelation. The analysis of faith will point to God's self-revelation to the humans.

2. Revelation

Faith and Revelation, though distinct and distinguishable, are Inseparably united. They are two sides of the same event. One cannot exist without the other. The object of faith is God, transcendentally ultimate, who can be known only when God reveals himself. Revelation is God's self-communication to humans and faith is the response on the human side. Revelation becomes a concrete historical reality only when human persons receive it. God's self-revelation becomes complete only when it is actualized and concretized by the human response. Any communication and self-gift presupposes two persons and two simultaneous actions, giving and receiving. Revelation is to be received, perceived, grasped and responded to. As there is another full treatise to deal with the details of faith and revelation, here we only want to introduce the concepts of faith and revelation since they are the foundation of theology and its sources. On the subject of revelation Vatican I I practically repeats the teachings of Vatican I; but gives it a personalistic flavour: God in his goodness chose to reveal or give himself to humankind. "In His goodness and wisdom, God chose to reveal Himself and to make known to us the hidden purpose of His will by which through Christ, the Word made flesh, man has access to the Father in the Holy Spirit and comes to share in the divine nature"(OV, 2). God created all things by the Word, and the created realities reveal the glories of God. God revealed himself and his plan of human salvation in history by calling Abraham, by liberating Israel from Egypt and by promising to humankind a Savior.

"Then after speaking in many places and varied ways through the prophets, God 'last of all in these days has spoken to us by his son' (Heb.l: 1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them the innermost realities about God... Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making himself present and manifesting himself: through his words and deeds, his signs and wonders, but especially through his death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover, He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed: that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal" (DV, 4).

Jesus Christ commissioned his Apostles and disciples to Proclaitn and communicate this revelation or gift of God or good news to the whole of 1umankind. The Church has received this heritage and tradition and proclaims it today. The Holy Spirit, the spirit of truth, bequeathed to the Church by Christ, leads her to the fuller understanding of this revelation (OV, 4-5). God's revelation is an utterly gratuitous self-gift of God. God 'speaking' to the humans is a human way of expressing this reality. God's message and the gift of divine life is what it signifies. God's word explains his actions in history and his actions witness to his word. God's word and deed belong together. God speaking, therefore, means the communication of his message al1d life by his dynamic presence in the heart of reality and of every person and by his special intervention in history. Edmund J. Dunn has given a comprehensive definition of revelation. Revelation is "God's gracious self-disclosure reaching out to humans as an invitation, as well as promise, to participate in God's own life of unfathomable love, mediated to us through persons, nature, history, everyday experience, and, in an ultimate way, in and through God's very Word, Jesus Christ"(What is Theology? 1998, pA2).

According to traditional Christian teaching, Jesus Christ is the fullness of God's revelation. There will be no further public revelation:

"Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father's one, perfect and unsurpassable Word. In him He has said everything; there will be no other word than this one... The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 65-66).

The teaching on the definitive and full revelation in Christ is very often misunderstood as if we already know the whole truth and everything about God's plan of salvation. We do not know yet in any comprehensive way the mystery of Christ. It has to be gradually unfolded by the work of the Spirit who alone will lead the Church into the fullness of truth. Revelation is 'closed' with Christ does not mean that God is no more present and acting in history. With the resurrection of Jesus and the sending of the Holy Spirit salvation history has already entered into a new and definitive period with the eruption of the Kingdom God into this world. God through the risen Christ and His Spirit is all the more dynamically present in the created world and in human, history leading the whole creation to II' its final fulfillment. In our age of pluralism and relativity of history, cultures and religions, naturally, any claim to monopoly of revelation by Christianity will be challenged. How can a single historical revelation mediate God's self-communication universally? Has not God revealed himself also to other peoples in other cultures, civilizations and religions? What about the claim made by other religions about God's revelation to them? Christian theology has not yet seriously grappled with this question. The documents of Vatican II, however, have affirmed God's presence and action in other cultures and religions (Nostra Aetate; Gaudiul11 et Spes, 22; Ad Gentes, 7). God's presence and action, of course, means his revelation by his dynamic presence and deed. The task of theology then will be to explain the relationship of God's revelation in Christ and in other religions. Revelation is, after all, not God merely revealing a set of truths, but an existential experience of transcendence and mediation, which is universal, as .God wills to save all people. God's revelation among other peoples and religions is made more explicit and definitive in His revelation in Christ. In Christ God fully revealed who and what a human person is, that He loves the whole humankind as His sons and daughters and that He is fully present and active in history to liberate humankind from injustice, oppression, sin and finally froJ11 death. God's dynamic presence in the heart of reality and his self­communication within every person and human community mean universal revelation, which is not a threat to Christian revelation. On the contrary, pluralistil'of religions and of revelations calls for dialogue and mutual relatedness, searching for a community of communities or the 'Kingdom of God'. It is true that Christianity does not deal with a revelation, which is general, universal and existential experience of transcendence, but with the concrete historical revelation in Jesus Christ, which is mediated by the Church. But a universal existential experience of transcendence is the basis of historical revelation, and at the same time, historical revelation reaches human persons through the subjective existential experience. Hence historical revelation and subjective experience have to be related in their polarity. As social beings all of us belong to a society and community. We receive many things from the community. Revelation, more precisely historical revelation, is not given to each person directly by God, but we receive it in and through the community. Every religious experience, here in our case, faith and revelation, is mediated to us in and by the community through signs and symbols, objects, events and persons. Christian revelation is, above all, a personal encounter with Jesus Christ, not simply some knowledge, wisdom, or cognitive truths. It is an experience of its own kind with a holistic charas;ter, which is totally engaging one's whole person, not only one's intellect and will. Revelation is thus a very complex reality and so is its concept. It has various components, which are often singled out and emphasized, and thus various models of revelation are presented.  Revelation as doctrine is one model. Here the cognitive contents of revelation' as propositions or deposit of truth are understood as revelation. They are either contained in the Sacred Scripture or passed on as tradition by the living Magisteriul11 of the Church. Another model conceives revelation as the presence within the believer as a personal encounter with God. It is not a mere communication of some knowledge, but the presence of the living and life-giving God. A third model conceives revelation as experience, the personal existential experience, which is universal and possible for all human persons. Revelation as history is a fourth model. It is not merely an event, which takes place in the inner subjectivity of the human person, rather it is an event of history, a universal and public' historical event that can be historically established by its analysis and interpreted as an act of God in human  models do not exclude each other; rather they must be interrelated. All these aspects constitute the different dimensions of revelation (Alister E. McGRATH, Christian Theology. AnIntroduction, 2001, pp.202-208). Revelational experiency is distinct from its expressions, interpretations and conceptualization. For example, what we have in the New Testament is not revelation as such; it is the expressions and interpretations of the original revelational experience of the Apostles and Disciples of Christ.

B. SOURCES OF THEOLOGY

Faith and Revelation are the foundations of theology, which point to the original and originating source of theology. Theology, as we have seen in Chapter I, is the interpretation of faith-experi~lce with reference to the actual real ity, problems and issues of today or the concrete context. It is a hermeneutical process, faith interpreting the context and the context, on the other hand, discerning the faith. Moreover, Christian faith and revelation are historical events. They speak about the faith-ex erience of the A ostles an disciples 0 Jesus and that of the early Christian community, which was the 'foundational faith. What about the faith of the present day Christians? How is the original faith mediated to them? Is there any continuity between their faith and the faith of the early Church? Where do we find the vehicles or media of faith and revelation in their concrete and actual existence? What are the yardsticks and norms to check the authenticity of faith and that of theologizing? What are the concrete and authentic sources for theologizing?

1. The Historical Debate on the Sources

        The early Church and the Fathers of the Church, especially Irenaeus, in the context of heresies, emphasized the necessity of fast to the Apostolic Tradition. The interpretation of the scriptures may be diverse, but the Apostolic Tradition is one and the same, to be accepted by all Churches. The foundational experience of revelation and its response in faith was expressed, lived and attested in the Apostolic Tradition. For the early Churches, the traditionary process or the handing on of the Apostolic Tradition was a complex process where, along with the written Scriptures, the catechesis, liturgy, prayers, sacraments, the ancient customs and the writings of the Fathers played important roles in mediating the foundational experience. Once the canon of the Scriptures was finalized, indeed, The Scriptures became the Supreme norm and the primary source of this founding tradition, of all doctrines and of theologies. Most of the writings of the Fathers of the church and the early Scholastics were simply the commentaries of the Bible. The 'Ecumenical Councils of the 4th and 5th centuries rejected the various Trinitarian and Christologycal heresies by clarifying and defining the Olihodox doctrinal positions. Thereafter the teachings on the Church and of those Councils became norm' (ill. the succeeding genera Ins. le medieval as well as modern theologians used to prove or substantiate their theological statements and arguments with reference to Sacred Scripture, Tradition, teachings of the Church and of the Councils, the Fathers of the Church and other theologians.

A debate on the sources of theology started with the medieval Reformers, especially Luther and Calvin, who proposed and defended the sola scriptura principle. With the printing and translations of the Bible, the Scriptures became accessible to all and thus very popular and there was enormous enthusiasm with regard to the Word of God and the biblical themes and doctrines. On the other hand, the medieval Church was greatly weighed down by various decadent practices. Sola Scripturqj became the battle cry for the radical reform of the Church from top to bottom. What the Reformers meant was the Bible, inspired by the Holy Spirit contained every thing.necessary for our salvation, and that there shall not be any teaching or practice of the Church, which contradicts the Word of God in the Bible. Scripture alone is the exclusive norm of faith.

The Council of Trent condemned the views of the Reformers and affirmed both Scripture and Tradition. The Council in its Decree on Sacred Boob- and on Traditions to be received said:

"Our Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, first promulgated it (the Gospel) from his own lips; He in turn ordered that it be preached through the apostles to all creatures as the source of all saving truth and rule of conduct. The Counci I clearly perceives that this truth and rule are contained in the written books and unwritten traditions, which have come down to us, having been received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, and have been transmitted as it were from hand to hand" (The Christian Faith, NEUNER and DUPUIS, no.210).

Whatever might have been the mind of the Council of Trent, when it spoke about the 'Gospel' 'contained' in 'written books' and unwritten traditions', in Catholic theology during the post Tridentine period it was very often understood that the Gospel is a set of saving truths and some of them are contained in the Scriptures and others in the tradition; namely, there was the theory of "two sources" of revelation: Scripture and Tradition. What underlies this is a ‘propositional' view of revelation, which is a defective 'understanding of revelation, as it is now clear from our short description of revelation given above. Christian revelation is an inter-personal encounter with Christ both at its origins and also today. It is a saving presence, a personal meeting with Christ by whom one is called to a saving relationship with God. This invitation is mediated to us in , numerous ways, through the Word of God in Scriptl1l'es, through the sacraments, prayer, devotions, doctrines, catechesis, teachings of the Church etc. In the light of a comprehensive notion of the tradition process, the Protestant principle of sola scriptura is all the more untenable. It has been established that both the Old Testament and the New Testament books are the traditiOtiS of the community, later coIIected, redacted and edited. The community has then the right to interpret them and apply them to life checking whether they are in 111 ne with the living faith of the community. After all, it is the community which identifies and attests to the Scriptures and thus ~xed the canon or the number oftl)e books to be accepted as inspired Scriptures. Hence Scriptures cannot be separated from tradition and the community. The contemporary ecumenical dialogues have solved this problem between Catholics and Protestants on the question of Scripture and Tradition, and there is today a substantial consensus: Revelation is understood primarily not as the communication of some truths (some contained in Scripture, others in Tradition), but as God' s self-communication in a personal encounter. tradition {with capital T) is the entire Gospel, which contains the foundational revelational and faith experience of the early Christian community  which is transmitted to  numerous ways to posterity within the written Scriptures have a prime place. Hence Tradition is more than the Scriptures and the sum total of the beliefs, practices and worship of the community: Its content is the self-communication of God, which is mediated by all these means. Tradition is thus handed down through various traditions (with small 't'). But this ongoing self­ communication of God by Tradition through the various traditions is basically the work of the Holy Spirit. The visible and historical ways of mediation (media fidei), the traditions, can be only the external vehicles. What enhances them to communicate the Tradition, God's self-gift, is by the work of the Holy Spirit. Vatican II, in its Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, gives the following clarification  on revelation, its transmission and its concrete sources today, which are, in fact, the sources of theology: Revelation or Gospel, the Good News, is God's gift of self communication and His plan of human salvation in Jesus Christ. Christ commissioned the Apostles to impart to all people the 'Gospel, which is the source of all saving truth, moral teaching, and divine gifts'. This commission was faithfully fulfilled by the Apostles by their oral preaching, example, ordinances, and by their writings, inspired by the Holy Spirit. Today the bishops, who are the successors of the apostles, continue this mandate and hand on the Apostolic Tradition with the apostolic authority. 'This tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit'. There is the 'living presence of this tradition', 'the living voice of the Gospel' in the Church. Mention is made of 'Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture'; both 'flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a certain unity and tena toward the same end'. "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of t~ word of God which is committed to the Church"(DV, 6-9).         .

"The task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed down, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding It scrupulously, and explaining it faithfully by divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit; it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed. It is clear, therefore, that Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and all together and each in its own way, under the action of the Holy Spirit, contribute effectively to the salvation of souls" (DV, 10).

To conclude the historical debate and discussion on the sources of revelation, faith and theology, we would like to affirm that according to Vatican II, there is only one single source, which contains the original historical revelational and faith experience of the early Apostolic or Christian community, identified as Apostolic Tradition, deposit of faith, or the Tradition. But in concrete, three distinct realities are identified as sources by Dei Verbum, Scripture. Tradi1iQn and the Church and its teaching authority. We shall briefly present some aspects of these sources.

2. The Three Sources

0) Sacred Scripture

The Church holds that the Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are the record of God's revelation and of the faith experience of the people of Israel and of the Apostolic Church, and accepts them as the normative source of faith and theology today. Scripture is said to be the norma norn/ans non-normata, the norm 'Which ultimately declares and is itself normed by no other criterion. We do not want to anticipate here the course on the 'Introduction to the Bible'. In that course, the questions on the formation of the Biblical books, their authors, fixing the Canon by the Church, the question of inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible, different schools of interpretation etc. will be studied in detail. Here we only briefly introduce the theological concept of Scripture in relation to theology. Vatican II, in Dei Verbum, explains the nature and authority of Scripture and its role as the primary source of theology: Both the Old and New Testament books were written by human authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, so that God can be said to be their author too, and they contain God's revelation. It follows that "the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching firmly, faithfully, and without error that truth which God wanted to put into the sacred writings for the sake of our salvation"~DV, 11 ). Since God's word is contained in human words, in order to find out what God really wants to communicate, Scripture needs to be interpreted, by carefully studying its language, literary forms, especially its basic Content and unity as understood by "the living tradition of the whole Church". The final authority for interpreting the Scripture is "the Judgment of the Church"(DV, 12).

"The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since from the table of both tbe Word of God and of the body of Christ she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life, especially in the sacred liturgy. She has always regarded the Scriptures together with sacred tradition as the supreme rule of faith, and will ever do so... Therefore, like the Christian religion itself, all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and ruled by Sacred Scripture. For in the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven meets His children with great love and speaks with them; and the force and power in the word of God is so great that it remains the support and energy of the Church, the strength of faith for her sons, the food of the soul, the pure and perennial source of spiritual life (DV, 21).

On the relation between Sacred Scripture and theology, Vatican II teaches "sacred theology rests on the written word of God, together with sacred tradition, as its primary and perpetual foundation". "Theology is most powerfully strengthened and constantly rejuvenated by that word". The sacred Scripture is "the soul of sacred theology"(DV, 24). On the one hand, theological reflection should be based on and nourished by the word of God in the Scriptures. On the other hand, theology has to discover, unfold and interpret the word of God. Theology, as we have explained in Chapter I, is hermeneutics, interpreting the word of God in the Scriptures in the light of the actual context, and interpreting the context in the light of the word of God. Why is Scripture normative for Christian faith and theology? In what sense is Scripture the word of God? How should we today understand revelation, inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures, especially of the New Testament? The revelation and inspiration of the Scriptures and its consequent inerrancy should not be anymore understood as God dictating the content of the Scriptures to the human authors who are merely passive in receiving God's revelation and inspiration. The Scriptures are the work of human authors who are conditioned by the history, culture and thought patterns of their own time. The authority of the Scriptures is derived ultimately from the authority of Jesus Christ who is the definitive revelation of God. What God has revealed in Christ can be said to be the Christian revelation, the Christian experience of God and God's revelation of His plan of human salvation in Christ. Jesus Christ became the historical medium of con1municating this original and originating religious experience to his disciples. The early Christian community expressed, interpreted and historically mediated this original Christian religious experience in different ways, especially through the written Scriptures under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Christian community itself by its supernatural sense of faith (sensus fidei), guided by the action of the Spirit, recognized, "'acknowledged and authenticated the validity of these written Scriptures as containing the original Christian experience and having the power to mediate it faithfully and truthfully. We do not want to elaborate these perspectives here. This will be elaborated in the courses on Introduction to the Bible, Formation of the Bible, Revelation and Faith etc. Everything in the Scriptures, therefore, cannot be taken literally as the absolute word of God, though the Scriptures contain the word of God. The word of God is presented and communicated by the human authors by means of the historical, cultural and social categories of their time as the backdrop of the world-views and understanding of the realities of their time. The word of God contained in the Scriptures or the foundational religious experience of Christian faith has to be disclosed and unfolded by the theological studies and interpretations of the Scriptures. One of the essential tasks of theology is precisely this interpretation of the Scriptures in the light of the central Christian faith and in the light of the contemporary human experience in the context of the realities of today.

b) Tradition and traditions

We have pointed out above that in reality there is only one source for Christian faith and revelation. This unique source is the historical faith-experience of the disciples of Jesus Christ of the definitive divine self-communication in Jesus Christ. This faith­-experience is expressed, reenacted and mediated through the Christian Tradition, or Apostolic Tradition, which had been mediated and communicated by the various and numerous elements Or components or traditions of that One Traditiona1. Written Scriptures are one of the most important components of that one Tradition. There are various other constitutive components and elements of that Tradition, which we may call traditions (with the small 't')o They are the different ecc/esial traditions, liturgy and sacraments, creeds, dogmas, doctrines and beliefs, prayers, devotions and spiritualities, disciplines and codes. teachings of the Fathers, and catechisms of the Church. We shall briefly introduce them as sources of theology.

i) Different Ecclesial Traditions

"That Church, Holy and Catholic, which is the Mystical Body of Christ, is made up of the faithful who are organically united in the Holy Spirit through the same faith, the same sacraments, and the same government and who, combining into various groups held together by a hierarchy, form separate Churches or rites. Between these, there flourishes such an admirable brotherhood that this variety within the Church in no way harms her unity, but rather manifests it. For it is the mind of the Catholic Church that each Individual Church or Rite retain its traditions whole and entire, while adjusting its way of life to the various needs of time and place (Vatican II, Orientalium Ecclesiarum, 2).

The different ecclesial traditions were very often called Rites. But an individual ecclesial tradition is more than a different liturgical rite or custom. It is preferable to call it an Individual Church, as Vatican II has done in the above paragraph. Churches with their own specific individualities or uniqueness can be called Individual Churches. It is a specific way of being the Church and living the Church. It includes differences in theological approaches, liturgies, spiritualities, disciplines, administrative structures, organization, customs, practices, including differences in the formulation of faith and doctrines and their interpretations. Vatican II elaborates these points when it speaks about the Eastern and Western Churches (See, Decree on Ecumenisl11, 14-18). The Council specially mentions the equal dignity of all the Individual Churches or Rites, however small they are in number. None of them is superior to the others. By stressing the equal dignity of all the Individual Churches, Vatican II rejects the earlier theories of the 18th century that the Roman Rite enjoyed some kind of precedence over other Rites. In the past, evangelization and planting of the Church in mission countries was conducted exclusively in the Roman Rite. Missionaries from the other Individual Churches or Rites had to adopt the Roman Rite to undertake a missionary apostolate. This was the usual practice in India (See, The Documents of Vatican II, edited by Walter M. Abbott, Decree on the Eastern Churches, Footnote, no.7). The Council also strongly recommends that these diverse ecclesial traditions and their different ways be maintained, respected and appreciated, of course with appropriate renewal and organic development. When the Gospel was preached to different nations and peoples, naturally, they responded to it from within their own way, from their own historical, social and cultural context, and thus the different Individual Churches were born. The same faith was expressed, lived, celebrated and articulated in different ways under these different ecclesial traditions. One and the same Christian Tradition was enfleshed in the different traditions. Unity in faith and the diversity of these traditions went hand in hand with a harmonious complementarity enhancing the catholicity of the Church. Different ecclesial traditions have to be mutually related and held together in communion, and Christian theology has to attend to all these diverse traditions and learn from one another. All these ecclesial traditions are the living sources for Catholic theology. The Catholic Church is a communion of 22 such different Individual Churches, of which the largest and the most universal is the Roman Church. The other 21 Churches belong to the Oriental traditions, some of which are very tiny, and some of them have the same liturgical tradition. Most of these Oriental Catholic Churches have their counterparts, separated from the Catholic communion due to the Christological controversies of the 4th and 5th centuries and the separation between Rome and Constantinople in the 11th century. These historical divisions in the Church will be seen in detail in the courses on Church history and Ecumenism. We have in India two Oriental Churches, the Syro-Malabar and the Syro-Malankara. The 22 Individual Churches in the Catholic communion belong basically to 6 different ancient liturgical traditions. They are Roman, Alexandrian, Antiochian, Armenian, Chaldean, and Byzantine. In this ecumenical era, we have to attend to the traditions and sources of the other Churches too, though on a different level. Any introduction to the concrete traditions of the 22 Catholic Individual Churches and of the other Churches in the areas of liturgy, doctrines and beliefs, prayers and devotions, spirituality, disciplines, other customs and practices, is beyond the scope of this course on Introduction to Theology. We speak here of the different sources of theology only in a generic way from a theological point of view.

ii) Liturgy, Sacraments and Prayers

In the liturgy and sacraments of the Church, especially in the eucharistic celebration, the saving Christ-event or the Paschal mystery, that is, the incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ, is proclaimed, celebrated and sacramentally reenacted so that its saving divine action and benefits be made present today for us. "Liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; at the same time it is the fountain from which all her power flows" (Vatican II, Sacrosanctllnl Conciliwl1, 10). While explaining the dictum, lex orandi, lex credendi, in Chapter I, we have explained briefly the importance of the liturgy for the life of the Church and for theology. As liturgy is the living source of Christian faith­experience and its medium, it is an important source of theology or locus theologicus. It is through the liturgy and the sacraments that the Christ-event and the Gospel is continuously proclaimed; in this way the Church is constituted or the Body of Christ is built up, or the believers are gathered into a community. In Baptism we die with Christ, are buried with Christ and rise with Christ, and thus we become incorporated with the One Body of Christ. In the Eucharist, by partaking from the one bread, we become one body, and in it Christ gives himself, his own life, to us. In the liturgical celebration Christ is present with his saving grace and He is the real minister. “When two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst f them” (Mt.lS: 20). Liturgy is also Church's supreme act of °orshiP and thanksgiving to the Father for His gift to us in Jesus Christ. "From this it follows that every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ, the priest and of His Body, toe Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others. No other action of the Church can match its claim to efficacy, nor equal the degree of it" (SC, no.7). Liturgy is made up of changeable and unchangeable elements, as there are divine (divinely instituted elements) and human elements in it. We know that all the particular liturgies have been influenced and developed in particular socio-historical and cultural contexts. When time and culture change, liturgies also need changes in response to the pastoral needs. But the regulations and changes in the sacred liturgy are entrusted to the official authority of the Church, as it is an official act and celebration of the Church and not a private act of the believers or Christian ministers. However, it is the task of theology not only to draw from this living source, but also to critically examine the liturgical celebrations from an historical, theological and pastoral point of view and suggest ways for its renewal according to our time and our pastoral needs. The basic and elementary forms of faith-responses are doxology (praising, adoring and thanking God), prayers, confession, witness, rites and rituals. Beliefs, doctrines, dogmas and theologies are second-level reflections on the faith-experience. Prayers of the Church are, therefore, real and enriching sources of theology. Here a prime place should be given to the official prayers of the Church, especially to the Liturgy of the Hours or Canonical Hours or Breviary. There had been various traditions of the Prayer of the Hours, both in the East and the West. We cannot go into the details of their origin and developments here. These prayers were drawn up from various sources such as, the Psalter, the Scriptures, hymnal, intercessions, litany etc. Through these prayers, meant for morning and evening, vigils and other times, the salvation history and the paschal mystery of Christ are recounted and proclaimed according to the liturgical seasons. It is meant to be the worship of the Church, both of the clergy and the people. The idea was that no hour of the day should pass without prayer. The monastic traditions and communities have contributed very much in the formation of these canonical prayers of the Church. These traditions of prayers are, indeed, rich sources for theological reflection.

iii) Creeds or Symbols  Beliefs and Doctrines

The Creeds or Symbols had their origins in the context of baptismal liturgy. The catechumens were initiated into the Church by the profession of faith at baptism. Later they were used in all liturgies and they became the rule of faith and the mark of orthodoxy against all heresies. Therefore, the creeds are primarily acts of faith; they also can be dogma.tic or metaphysical statements. However, this profession of faith or act of faith (fides qua) has its intellectual dimensions expressed in beliefs and doctrines (fides quae). For example, "I believe in God, the creator of all" is primarily an act of faith in God, and secondarily, it contains a doctrine or belief that God has created everything. The New Testament books already contain different formulas of confession of faith, confessing that Jesus is the Lord, Son of God etc (1 Cor 12:3; Rom 10:9; Heb 4:14). To these confessions, later on, some other historical facts were added, such as, the virginal conception, crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, resurrection, coming of the Holy Spirit, and thus the present creeds or symbols gradually were shaped. The Apostles' Creed or the Roman Symbol is probably the first one, which came into vogue in the 3rd century. It is called the Apostles' Creed because it goes back to or is derived from the Apostolic preaching. There existed also a legend that it is constituted of 12 articles, each artic Ie attributed to one of the 12 apostles. There are also other creeds, which originated in the East, such as, the Nicene Creed, the Creed of Constantinople, the Athanasijln Creed etc. They were developed, as we mentioned above, in a "liturgical context, and they were also the profession of faith of the Ecumenical Councils against the heretics. The content of the ancient creeds thus goes back to the apostolic preaching and tradition, and thus they enjoy a pre-eminent authority in the Church. They were 'the rule of faith' and the expression of the faith professed by the Fathers according to the Scriptures'. Thus

they became the norm of faith and the touchstone of orthodoxy. Today the Church and its Magisterium, or teaching authority of the Church and theology refer to the creeds as the source of faith or medium of faith, and there is an ecumenical onsensus that the creeds are the' sufficient expressions of faith', though there can be some freedom in the interpretation of the articles of the creeds. Hence the creeds are to be professed, proclaimed and recited devotionally as our act of faith, and they can be instrumental in mediating and disclosing the faith of the Church. ivY The Teachin?A of the Fathers of the Church The 'Fathers of the Church' are the ancient Christian writers who witness to the faith of the early Church. Hence they and their writings are very important for the faith of the Church and for theology as one of the sources. The period of the Fathers extends from the close of the New Testament period till the death of John Damascene (749) in the East and Gregory the Great (604) and Isidore of Seville (639) in the West. In order to be included among the -'Fathers of the Church' four characteristics are necessary: antiquity, orthodoxy, holiness of life and the recognition by the Church. There are several classifications and divisions among the Fathers: Apostolic Fathers, Apologists, Syrian Fathers, Greek Fathers, Latin Fathers etc. The course on "Patrology" will introduce you into the world of the Fathers and their writings and contributions. The Fathers' works belonged to three main areas: First of all, many of them wrote commentaries on the Scriptures with pastoral and didactic concerns. Secondly, they fought against the numerous heresies during the early period of Christianity and defined and defended the genuine and true Christian faith and thus established orthodoxy. Thirdly, they tried to introduce and articulate the Christian faith in the different cultural and philosophical categories of the time In a way understandable and acceptable to the different nations and peoples. Thus the Fathers and their teachings are sources, inspiration

and guidance for theologies of all times. But to the questions and issues of our time, we may not find the answers in the works of the Fathers, for our situation and realities today are quite different from the time of the Fathers. Theology today, therefore, cannot be satisfied with just repeating the teachings of the Fathers. Their initiatives and pioneer attempts can be, however, inspiration and models for the theologians of all times.

v) Dogmas

By dogma what is generally meant in theology is a truth or the proposition of a truth explicitly propounded by the Church as revealed by God, or as contained in the deposit of faith. In the past dogmas were very often understood as the set of truths revealed by God, and along the same line, revelation was understood as God revealing a set of truths, and faith as the acceptance of these truths. Today, on the other hand, the emphasis is on revelation as a saving event in which God communicates Himself as a free gift to the humans, and faith as the human response and commitment to God. How is it possible to understand and explain dogmas from this perspective?

God's revelation in Jesus Christ is a historical event and reality, and it has a definitive character, a once-for-all character. The Apostolic community or the early Christian community is the bearer of this revelation, and their faith-experience has to be mediated to all peoples at all times and places. As mentioned above, this Apostolic Tradition is mediated by several ways including Sacred Scripture, traditions, liturgy, sacraments, dogmas, doctrines etc. Beliefs, doctrines and dogmas are the rational and intellectual expressions, articulations, and elaboration of the faith-experience. Dogmas are the proclamation of God's definitive revelation in Christ by the Church in human language in the form of propositions of truth with an abiding validity, though they need to be interpreted as in the case of the Scriptures. Dogmas are therefore certain permanent linqistic and rational expressions of faith, approved by the Church in order to safeguard the unity of faith and make that unity visible "and tangible for us and for all times. By defining dogmas the Church officially fixes a common faith language and a mode of expression ? order to distinguish it from the false and heretical ones. Thus the ~~gl11as safeguard and control the faith-language and help mediate the right faith. The Church by its magisterial authority and by the sensUS fidei of the Christian community fixes the faith-language and the dogmas. However, as in the case of the Scriptures, the dogmatic definitions of the Church are contextualized by the culture, history and language of the time. Hence they need continuous interpretation and reinterpretation, and even reformulation for every new age and culture, though the core of faith in the original formulations can never be abandoned or totally rejected. The historical dogmas, defined by the Church, have indeed a perennial value. We would like to note here two other points: One is the question of the development of dogma. Christian faith needs always new understanding, interpretations and formulations as we pass from one age to another age. The Holy Spirit leads the Church into the fullness of truth. Therefore, the Church accepts the development of dogmas that remains implicit in Christian faith can be made explicit and articulated. Thus new teachings and definitions are accepted in principle though they can be only explicitations and new understandings of the deposit of faith, never entirely new additions. Second question is the hierarchy of dogmas. Vatican II has taught that all truths of revelation and faith do not have equal status. "When comparing doctrines they (Catholic theologians) should remember that in the Catholic teaching there exists an order or 'hierarchy' of truths, since they vary "in their relationship to the foundation of the Christian faith" (UR, 11). The foundation of Christian faith is the mystery of Christ and salvation in Christ. The importance or significance or weight of a truth depends on its specific relationship to the mystery of Christ. Dogmas are therefore the sources of theology. They always perform the role of norm, guidance, inspiration and lights on the path of theology. At the same time, theology also has the role of interpreting the dogmas, reformulating them for every new age, showing their implications and meaning for actual Christian life and also midwifing the development of dogmas in the historical unfolding  of Christian faith and the mystery of Christ.

vi) Customs, Disciplines and Codes

Although the Church is a religious and spiritual community held together by the common faith-experience and united by the action and power of Christ and the Holy Spirit, it is all the same a visible human society and community with an organic structure and hierarchical authority, having different functions for all the members for its own life and mission. Hence the Church needs laws, regulations and disciplines. As in the case of the development of the written scriptures and dogmas, so also, the customs,  practices, disciplines and functions and their mutual relationships were gradually codified, and thus written laws and codes came into existence. The Christian way of life and practices were thus prior to theological reflection, and therefore, the former were the sources for theology. The Christian heritage oflaws and disciplines has its origin both in the Old and New Testaments. The Ten Commandments of the OT is the supreme example of this. Though Paul emphasizedjustification by faith and not by law, he insisted on the binding nature of Decalogue (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:13-25) and the need of discipline in the Church (I Cor 5-6). The present code of canons in the Western Church, or Latin Code has its origin from the 'Decretals' or letters of ecclesiastical authorities, especially of the Popes, giving instructions or decisions on ecclesiastical matters to the different Churches. Such  Decretals were collected and edited for the use of the Churches. Gratian made the most comprehensive collection of such Decretals and canons and their first proper codification in the 12th century. Thereafter, in the history of the Western Church several revisions were done. In the 20th century itself, two revisions of the code of canons were made, one in 1917 and the other after the Vatican II in 1983. The post-Vatican II revision was a radical one, done in the context of the Council's new ecclesiology with emphasis on the People of God, the basic equality of all the members of the Church, the collegiality of the bishops and the collegial way of functioning of the Church at all levels. The ancient Eastern Churches had their own disciplines and laws and the Patriarchal Churches and their Synods had complete autonomy in the functioning of their own Churches. The attempts for the codification of the common laws of the Catholic Eastern Churches began in 1929 with the initiative of Pope Pius XI. Vatican II gave a new impetus to the codification of the laws of the Eastern Catholic Churches with the vision of the Church as the Communion of Churches. The new Eastern Code was promulgated in 1990. The recent Popes very often referred to the Universal Church as gathered in the one Spirit, but breathing with two lungs - of the East and the West, and burning with the love of Christ in one heart having two ventricles, the East and the West. The purpose of the Codes is "not in any way to replace faith, grace, charisms and above all charity in the life of the Church or of Christ's faithful. On the contrary, the Code rather looks towards the achievement of order in the ecclesial society, such that while attributing a primacy to love, grace and the charisms, it facilitates at the same time an orderly development in the life both of the ecclesial society and of the individual persons who belong to it" (JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Constitution promulgating the New Code of Canon Law, 1983). Codes are naturally sources of theology, and at the same time, theology has the prophetic role to examine critically if laws stifle the Gospel, love, genuine freedom and justice.

vii) Catechisms of the Church

Another source of theology is the official Catechisms of the Church. Originally catechesis meant oral instruction on Christian faith to the neophytes in preparation for their baptism and initiation into the Church. Later, with the infant baptism, baptized children were given elementary teachings by parents and the Church, and in this connection, we hear about catechismus and 'Catechism books'.

The Middle Ages saw many catechism books, such as, that of Martin Luther (1529), of Peter Canisius (1556), of Robert Bellarmine (1598). Until the New Catechism, what has been used in the Universal Church was the Catechism of the Council of Trent, published in 1566 by Pope Pius V, which was compiled by St.Charles Borromeo. After the Vatican II, during the extraordinary assembly of the Synod of Bishops, held in 1985, to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the conclusion of the Council, the bishops proposed the compilation of a new catechism for the use of the Universal Church. The bishops wanted that the renewal initiated by the Council should reach the rank and file of the people by a common catechism. It was approved and after 6 years of intense work by a committee, the new catechism was published in 1992 with the name, Catechism of the Catholic Church. This new catechism combined the old and the new. It followed the pattern and structure of the catechism of the Council of Trent with four parts: the Creed, the Sacred Liturgy, the Christian Way of Life (the Ten Commandments), and Christian Prayer. But it is an entirely new catechism, with new material drawn from the Sacred Scriptures, the Fathers, the teaching of the Magisterium, especially of the documents of the Vatican II. The new catechism is not meant to replace the catechisms of the local Churches, but only to inspire the compilation of new local catechism books adapted to the local situations and cultures.

c) Magisterium or Teaching Office of the Church

The teaching office of the Church or Magisterium is a source for theology, which is clearly distinct from the Scriptures and Tradition. However, as we had mentioned above, in the actual functioning, all the three are inseparably related and united. The ultimate authority for the interpretation of the Scriptures is vested in the Magisterium of the Church. In constituting the Christian faith, the Apostles played the key ­role, and they were also instrumental in communicating the faith. In Catholic ecclesiology, the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and they have the authority in the Church for teaching, sanctifying and governing. This teaching authority is exercised in various ways and at different levels with varying degrees of authority.  The individual bishops exercise the ordinary teaching authority in their own particular Churches. But the supreme teaching authority in the Universal Church is vested in the whole body of the bishops, in the college of the bishops, in communion with the Roman Pontiff, according to the doctrine of Episcopal Collegiality, as taught by the Vatican II in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. However, the doctrine of collegiality of bishops does not take away the supreme teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff. It must be also noted that the authority of the Pope and the Bishops does not suppress the role of the whole body of the faithful in matters of faith. Hence we identify in this section three elements as sources of theology: the teachings of the body of bishops, the teachings of the Pope, the sense of faith of the community (sensus fidei, sensus fidelium).

i) Collegiality of the Bishops

The Collegiality of the Bishops implies that all the bishops in the Catholic Church together constitute a single body or collegium, college, or collegial body, upon which is vested the supreme teaching authority of the Church. This supreme body has the final authority in teaching, sanctifying and governing the Universal Church (LG, nos.18-23). The New Testament basis for the collegiality of the bishops is the choosing of the 12 by Christ, who commissioned them to proclaim the Gospel and gather the Disciples of Christ by teaching, sanctifying and ministering them. Vatican II teaches that in the Church there is an uninterrupted sacred order of bishops and that it is by 'divine institution' that the bishops have succeeded to the place of the Apostles (LG, no.20). The bishops today are thus recognized by the Church as the successors of the Apostles. Hence as the Apostles formed one body headed by Peter,' so today the bishops in the Universal Church form one body or college presided by the Roman Pontiff who succeeds Peter in his ministry of gathering, leading and presiding over his brethren. The body of the bishops is given a special authority and charism or gift by the power of the Risen Lord and the Holy Spirit to exercise their duty and special ministry in the Church. However, the teaching authority of the body of bishops is limited to the deposit of faith,

entrusted to them, in order to protect, preserve and explicate it for every new age, and hand it over meaningfully to every new generation. The body of the bishops cannot add anything new to the deposit of faith. The body of the bishops can teach with different levels of authority. Vatican II in Lumen Gentium teaches this clearly in number 25. The body of the bishops along with its head the Roman Pontiff exercises its ordinary teaching authority in matters of faith and morals in the day-to-day life of the Church in various ways. The teachings of the ecumenical councils, indeed, have a supreme place. The members of the Church accept their teaching with a 'religious submission of will and mind'. The body of the bishops with its head can also teach with extraordinary teaching authority or infallible teaching authority in matters of faith and morals, either gathered in an ecumenical councilor even when dispersed around the world, when they intend to do so in communion with each other and with the head, as a collegial act. The faithful are bound in conscience to accept such teachings as part of the deposit of faith. The teachings of the body of bishops are important sources oftheology, though the task of theology is not merely limited to explaining and interpreting the magisterial teachings. The prophetic and hermeneutic task of theology includes also the responsibility of critically examining the traditional understandings and teachings of the Church and its Magisterium in the context of contemporary realities.

ii) Papal Magisterium

Ecclesia catholica in the early centuries was marked by the fraternal communion among all the Churches in holding faithfully to the common Apostolic Tradition, the common celebration of the Eucharist, and in the fellowship of all the Bishops in the neighborhood who assisted each other especially in the ordination of new bishops. Catholic communion anchored in the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome was doctrinally and theologically legitimate based on the specific role of Peter in the New Testament. In fact the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome was solemnly defined only by the First Vatican Council (1870), though the teachings of Roman Primacy had its origin much earlier and it was officially attested in the teachings of the Councils of Lyons (1274), and later in the council of Florence (1439), both directed towards the profession of faith demanded on the part of the Greeks after their separation.

Various factors contributed to the development of the Roman Primacy. Rome was the political center and capital of the empire for several centuries, especially when Christianity began to establish itself by shaping its institutional structures. However this political importance of Rome alone cannot fully explain the primacy of the Church of Rome. Rome's emergence as the center of the Church can be seen as providential. It was not a calculated move or a missionary strategy on the part of Peter and Paul to start from Rome. It was mere providence, which brought them to Rome. Peter was a fugitive to Rome, and Paul was taken to Rome as a prisoner. In fact, the Papal Primacy and its exercise was a gradual historical development in order to counter the political interference in the affairs oftheChurch by the kings and emperors. Papal Primacy thus laid a strong ecclesiastical foundation and theological basis for the unity of the Church as an alternative to the imperial Church system, which united the Church in the Roman_Empire. Th~ most important factor for the development of Roman primacy was the gradual awareness that the Bishops of Rome are the successors of Peter and thatthey administer the office of Peter as the head of the Apostles and the bed-rock or foundation of the unity of the Church as referred to in the New Testament: "So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church" (Mt. 16: 18). In all the Apostolic Churches there was a consciousness and belief that the Apostles were still alive in their Churches. As Peter who was the leader of the Apostles and the foundation ofthe Church was the founder of the Church in Rome and as he died there, it was believed that Peter continued to live in Rome. The Bishops of Rome were considered as the sllccessors of Peter who continued the role of Peter in holding the Churches together. In addition to all these factors, it may be pointed out that the emergence of a universal authority with the primary concern of the unity of the Church derived from the very essential nature ofthe Church. In the context of the rapid spread of Christianity and of the increasing problems of heresies and schisms among the Christians,

conciliar structures and the function of a Petrine ministry of presidin~ over the Communion of Churches were bound to evolve in th: Church under guidance of the Holy Spirit. But many aspects of thepresent form and structures of Papacy and of Roman Primacy are the result of a gradual historical development. All these you will study in detail later in the courses, such as, Church history, Theology

of the Church etc.

According to Catholic ecclesiology the Pope as the successor of Peter has a definite role to play in the communion of Churches. He is a visible sign of unity and the bond of communion, the servant and instrument of unity. But ecclesial structures and the way and style of the functioning of the Papacy are part of a dynamic process in history under the continuous guidance of the Holy Spirit. Vatican I (I 870) defined the Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility. Accordingly, the Roman Pontiff is the head of the Universal Church. He has both juridical and teaching authority over all the Individual and Particular Churches. As the universal head, he has also the extraordinary authority to define and teach matters of faith and morals with infallibility under certain conditions. The doctrine of Papal Primacy of Vatican I has been, in fact, today complemented by the Second Vatican Council's teaching of the doctrine of the Collegiality of the Bishops, which we have seen above. That is to say, even when he teaches with the authority of Primacy, in fact, he is doing it as the head of the college of bishops in communion with the bishops.

There are several kinds of Papal teachings, such as, Papal definitions or solemn infallible teachings, ordinary Papal teachings in the forms of Encyclicals, Apostolic letters etc. The dogmas of the

Immaculate Conception of Mary and her Assumption are two such solemn, infallible definitions, made by the Popes. There are several encyclicals of the Popes on different topics and themes. They are ordinary teachings, mostly pastoral guidelines. All these have to be the sources of theology.

iii) Sensus Fidei, Sensus Fidelium

        The fact that the highest teaching authority of the Church is ted in the Roman Pontiff and the body of the bishops does not ~~s inish the role of the entire Christian community in matters of t I~h and morals. The deposit of faith resides in the entire body of ~e faithful. Vatican II has affirmed this when it presents the Church t rimarily as the 'People of God'. The Church is 'a community of ~rethren' who enjoy equality, fraternity and freedom with individual responsibility. Every Christian shares in the priestly, prophetic and pastoral ministry of Christ, for which they have received the gift of the Holy Spirit (LG, 10-12). Thus Vatican II corrects the exaggerated view that the hierarchy is the exclusive channel of the working of the Holy Spirit. The entire body of the faithful possesses 'a supernatural sense offaith' (sensus fidei), which is the ultimate norm in matters of faith and morals. The teachings of the Roman Pontiff and the body ofthe bishops are based on this sensus fidei of the entire Christian community (sensusfidelium). The Magisterium has always to discern and check this supernatural sense of faith of the entire Christian community. Vatican II teaches:

"The body of the faithful as a whole, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of belief. Thanks to a supernatural sense of the faith which characterizes the People as a whole, it manifests this unerring quality when, 'from the bishops down to the last member of the laity', it shows universal agreement in matters of faith and morals" (LG, ] 2).

The deposit of faith residing in the entire Christian community' is not a static reality, but a dynamic one, subjected to growth and development, moving towards the fullness of truth. The growth and development of faith by ever new interpretations is the task of the entire Church, guided by the Magisterium and inspired by the work of the theologians. However, the ultimate source of this growth and development of faith in the Church is the Holy Spirit who arouses faith and sustains and nourishes it in the faithful and leads the Church to the fullness of the truth. By this supernatural sense of faith in the community, which is the work of the Holy Spirit, the people as a whole discern the Word of God, distinguish true faith from error,   adhere to the true faith, penetrate it, bring forth new insights and   apply them to their life. The Magisterium, therefore, listens and consults the entire Christian community in various ways before it makes any judgment in matters of faith and morals. For, the sensus fidei of the whole Church is the norm and basis for the authentic teaching. One of the primary sources of theology is this sensusjidei of the Christian community, and it is the task of theology to discern it, make it explicit and to interpret it according to the changing times. Thus for theologizing, we need the harmonious blending of three elements, the sensus fidei of the community, the charism and guidance of the Magisterium and the intuitive and prophetic work of the theologian.

                                      

C. RESOURCES OF THEOLOGY

The basic assumption behind our search for the historical sources of Christian theology is the following: God has definitively acted and spoken in human history in the person of Jesus Christ, who is God's Word become incarnate. The faith and revelational experience of the apostolic community is the historical source of Christian faith. This faith and revelational experience of the early Christian community is historically mediated by several means and ways. These latter were identified in the above pages as the historical sources of Christian theology. Those sources have a permanent and normative value or function. However, they are not mere external authorities. They become powerful, dynamic and living sources by the power and working of the Holy Spirit, who continually leads and guides the Christian community unto the fullness of truth.

Does it mean that God's revelation as His self-gift, His action, and His 'speaking' abruptly and once for all ended with Jesus Christ? Does it mean that God has ceased to act, speak and reveal Himself today? No, in spite of God's definitive revelation in Jesus Christ, God is still present and acting in the world and in human history in various ways, especially by the work of the Risen Lord and the Holy Spirit. Even prior to the incarnation of the Word in Jesus Christ, God had certainly intervened, acted and spoke in h urn an history. Therefore, there are other sources for the Word of God and for theologizing, which we would call here as other resources of theology, in order to distinguish them from the historical Christian sources of theology, mentioned in the above pages. Theology needs to draw from all the available sources, whether specifically Christian or not, while searching for answers to the issues and questions of today and in order to arrive at the fullness of truth.

While holding fast to God's definitive revelation in Jesus Christ, the Church also affirms God's presence and activity in the world. In the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes), the Church today officially teaches that God is present and He also acts in the world, in creation and nature, in every authentic human experience, in the hearts of all people, in all history, cultures and religious traditions, especially, in the voices and movements of the subaltern peoples for justice, freedom, equality and peace. Theology has to closely attend to all these resources, as it reads the signs of the times in the hermeneutical process of theologizing in the actual historical context of today. A living and dynamic Christian theology which is not an esoteric knowledge, but a practical tool for the analysis of human life and of society in view of new self-understanding of humankind, radical renewal and reinterpretation of human life, must be ready to meet the depths of other faiths and human experience in general. We shall now just indicate some of these resources of theology.

1. People and their Experience

One of the primary resources of theology is people and their experience. God's self-gift or self-communication or revelation is directed to all people, irrespective of caste, creed and nationality. After the Cornelius episode Peter said: "The truth I have now come to realize is that God does not have favorites, but that anybody of any nationality who fear God and does what is right is acceptable to him" (Acts] 0:34-35). God is the creator, sustainer, and final destiny of ali peoples and the entire creation. Vatican II has affirmed that the whole of humankind is related to the 'People of God', though this belonging may be of different grades (LG, ] 4-] 6). The different peoples in the world, the diverse ways God spoke to them, acted in their histories, and the diverse ways they responded to God's self~ communication and actions are important resources of theology. The histories of the people, their civilizations and cultures, religious traditions, their struggles and movements against evil powers oppressive forces, injustice, their freedom struggles etc are valuabl~ resources for theologizing. The imagination and wisdom of the people, their creativity in different forms, in art, architecture, music dance, stories, poetry, and literature have to be taken into accoun; by theology. The people themselves are thus the resources of revelation, and it is through the people that God speaks to us. After all, it was the so-called primitive people of the ancient times who created our languages, cultures, religions and their scriptures. At the same time, it should be asked what contribution could theology make to the lives of people, to its quality and towards the creation of a new society.

/

God's self-gift or revelation reaches human persons through human experience. Human experience is the meeting-point between God's self-gift and the human response to it. Human experience is thus the starting-point of all religious and theological investigations. Human experience is varied and diverse, and so too religious experience. As the faith-experience of the early Christians and its articulations were the main source of Christian faith. so too the experience of other peoples, especially their religious experience and its articulations in different forms have to be attended to by Christian theology. Spiritual truth and its experience cannot be limited to any one age, culture and religious tradition. While affirming the diversity of religious experiences, we should equally affirm the unity and complementarity of diverse religious experiences and perceptions and the different symbolic systems, at the same time affirming that Jesus is the source of salvation for all. The human experiences of the past generations is stored up and embedded in the various human institutions, cultural and religious traditions, and in various other human creations, like art, literature, philosophy and other sciences as mentioned above. Along with the past experience of humankind. the present experience of people in diverse realms of life in the text of the realities of today must be carefully examined and conlyzed. Generally speaking, present human experience must be taken

into account in all theological investigation.

       We shall specially mention here four main areas of the esources of theology: diverse cultures, various religious traditions ~f humankind, peoples' movements and the voice of the marginalized, and the cry of the poor.

2. Cultural Resources

Culture is a complex phenomenon and reality, which lends itself to numerous definitions; and further more, there are different approaches to the study of culture and its analysis. Culture is generally understood as the way of life of a people, a total vision of life of a particular people, which consists of various components such as, their values, signs and symbols, customs, traditions, arts, stories, folklore, myths, etc. Human life, nature, culture and religion are intimately related (GS, 53 -62). On the one hand, humans create culture; they are the artisans and authors of their own culture, by which they develop and refine their own talents and qualities and control their surroundings and the world by their knowledge and labor (GS, 55). On the other hand, the culture of a group of people shapes and orientates the lives of people by the process of socialization and education whereby people are introduced and sustained in life with a sense of unity and continuity by culture. However, culture is not a static reality; every culture is open to the cultures of other peoples and to the change that is brought about by time and history. Today the living conditions of peoples have radically changed due to various factors, such as, science, technology, computerization, globalization and rapid communication, and it has affected the cultures of all people. There is thus the development of a universal or global or mass culture with new ways of thinking, acting and of viewing and organizing human life and its various activities. On the other hand, it is paradoxical that people have become today more and more conscious about their own identities, of their own culture, language, racial and ethnic belongingness.

Diversity of cultures is a human and historical reality. Eaci culture is unique, something to be understood from within, havin 1 its own values, meaning systems, symbols, its own inner logic an~ connections, so that cultures cannot be easi Iy compared or classified The more intimately one knows a culture, the more one becolne~ aware of specificity and beauty. No culture is to be treated as inferior or superior. The so-called developed societies and cultures very often betray very many inhuman, individualistic and consumeristic elements, and the so-called primitive societies and cultures often promote more authentic human values. However, all cultures whether ancient or modern, can embody elements of sinfulness' distortion and the forces of human enslavement and alienation. Henc~ any kind of cultural romanticism and self-sufficiency has to be questioned. Contact with other cultures, openness to change and a certain amount of cross-fertilization of cultures are necessary for the well-being and dynamic and organic growth of each culture. At the same time, human history has taught us several lessons. There had been invasions of cultures by the powerful peoples and their cultures, and many cultures were simply wiped out or treated as inferior. Colonialism and globalization have alienated many people frolll the roots of their own cultural traditions. Identity, rootedness in one's own culture and openness to healthy cultural change has to go hand in hand. Every culture has the task of a give and take for its own organic growth.

The relationship among faith, religion and culture is a complex one. As seen above, God is present and active among all peoples of all races, nationalities and cultures. The cultures of people, therefore, contain their experience, including their religious and spiritual experiences, and very often religion functions as the inner dynamic core of cultures, though perhaps not in all cultures in the same way. Vatican II speaks about the pedagogy of God that He speaks to humans according to their culture of different ages (GS, 58). Hence human cultures are clearly resources of theology. Besides, Christian faith and the Gospel are meant for all peoples and cultures, and they have to be incarnated in different cultures. The diversity of cultures is, in fact, the source of ecclesial pluralism and theological pluralism.

Finally, if God and His Spirit are present and active in all pIes and cultures, Christian theology has to change its traditional pe~hod of mission and evangelization, which often imposed Christ rned the Gospel from outside at the expense of the identity and ~~stOrical continuity of a culture. True, the acceptance of Christ and the Gospel very often demanded a break from one's own traditional culture. On the contrary, what theology has to do is, first of all, to listen to each culture and to dialogue with it and thus to discover the presence and working of the Risen Lord and His Spirit within that culture. It requires deeper study and analysis of cultures on the part of theology, and we need serious cross-cultural studies.

3. Diverse Religious Traditions

The discovery of the other religions of the world as resources of Christian theology is, perhaps, the greatest challenge facing our time. Its implication for the self-understanding of the Church and its mission is far reaching. In recent times, the Christian approach to the other religions has undergone a radical change. In the history of Christianity's encounter with other religions,- we could identify three distinct stages. In the first stage, Christianity with its universal and absolute claims saw the other religions as a threat to its own existence, survival and growth. In this period, the other religions were looked upon as 'false religions', 'merely man-made' and 'magical' and even as the 'devi]'s work'. The missionary thrust at this period involved in conquering other peoples and their religions and converting them to Christianity. In the second period, Christianity began to look at other religions more closely and more scientifically, and to accept the human values and truths contained in them, though they were not considered on par with Christianity. The other religions Were considered as human and natural, whereas Christianity was considered as supernatural and divinely revealed, and thus the fulfillment of all other religions.

Today, we are at a third stage in our encounter with the other religions. God created all people in his own 'image and likeness', and He is present and active in all authentic religious traditions, which may be considered as containing elements of salvation for their believers, though not in opposition to the salvation offered by Christ On the contrary, these elements of salvation in other religions ar~ closely related to the salvation in Christ. Both have to be necessarily related. The Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church teaches that salvation is available to all those who strive to do the will of God "as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience"(LG, 16). The Council's Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian religions acknowledges that all religions "reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all, and exhorts the members of the Church to acknowledge, preserve and promote the spiritual and moral goods" in other religions (NA. 2). On the salvific role of the other religions the Catholic Bishops of Asia made the following declaration:

"We accept them (the Great religions of Asia) as significant and positive elements in the economy of God's design of salvation...over many centuries they have been the treasury of the rei igious experience of our ancestors, from which our contemporaries do not cease to draw light and strength...And how Can we not acknowledge that God has drawn our peoples to Himself through them?" (FASC, Taipei, 1974).

God's love and grace have no limits and boundaries; it is universal. God's revelation or self-gift is unconditionally given to all peoples, and the varieties of religious traditions in the world may be seen as different kinds and Ways of human response to God's self­gift, or the different ways of encountering the mystery of God or the Absolute Reality. The religious traditions of the world are diverse, and each one is unique with entirely different symbolic systems, though all of them have a Common soteriological thrust, namely, liberation and salvation of hUll1anity here and hereafter. It does not mean necessarily that all religions are equally authentic. For, the ~act of human sin can affect or distort all religions, of course in varYIng degrees. In fact, many religions have an ambiguous character.combining both liberative and enslaving elements. Hence all religions are in need 0 contll1uous reform.

Theology should give special attention to the Scriptures of other religions. The sacred Scriptures of all religions are the heritage of the entire humanity. For centuries in the Scriptures of religions millions of people found the Word of God that guided their lives, nourished their spirits and sustained their hopes. The spiritual experience they contain, the vision they syt,nbolize and the liberation potential they carry through their numerous myths, stories, narratives and sayings shall be powerful and rich resources for theology. However, these sacred Scriptures, their stories, narratives and sayings need to be reread and reinterpreted in the context of today so that they become powerful sources in the construction of a new humanity. One of the important tasks of theology today, in the context of the side by side existence of many religions, is to promote genuine interreligious dialogue. In dialogue the mutual encounter of religions takes place, calling for mutual learning, reform and purification. In dialogue people of all religions are called to enter into a new relationship and thus to establish human unity, solidarity and communIOn.

4. The Peoples' Movements and the Voice of the Marginalized

The history of Israel in the Old Testament is the story of a people's movement, initiated and guided by God all through its various stages. The Exodus was the story of the struggles and triumph of an oppressed people. The conquest of Palestine was the victory of the peasants for their birth right of land. Similarly, in the New Testament, the Jesus' Community or the Church was a people's movement. It gathered together the poor, the sick, the oppressed, the tax collectors, the sinners, the prostitutes and the marginalized people and created a community with freedom, equality, justice, love and fellowship with total openness to others and service to all. The Bible is thus a witness and a call to identify the people's movements today and to be part of those movements. If in the past God initiated a guided the people's movements for freedom, justice, equality a~~ fellowship, He will do the smne today also, because God is the sall1e yesterday, today and tomorrow.

There are numerous people's movements today, such as, hUl11al1 rights movements, women's movements, peasants' movements fisher folk movements, tribal movements, Dalit movements' ecological movements, etc. These movements generally stand fo: freedom, justice, and equal dignity of all God's people and for the sustenance and protection of God's world. God's word resounds in a special way in the voice of the marginalized. Theology should pay special attention to the voice of women, the dalits and the tribafs. Women are more than 50% in the world today, but their voice is not sufficiently headed, and they are not adequately represented in the decision-making bodies. They have been the victims of a patriarchal society, which discriminated against Women. The dai'its and the tribals are similarly marginalized, discriminated and oppressed by the upper caste and the dominant socio-economic groups. It is the task of theology to identify the peoples movements and the voice of the marginalized today, to become one with them, animate, support and guide them, and to evaluate their movements in the light of the Gospel values. The people's movements and the voice of the marginalized are the locus of God's word and action in the world today and thus powerful resources for th,eologizing.

5. The Cry of the Poor

In the socio-economic realm today the gulf between the rich and the poor is ever widening due to the structures of injustice. The western developmental model, globalization, market economy, the misuse of science and technology, which exploit natural resources and human labor for the profit and greed of a very smal/minority are among the main causes for this divide of humanity and for the misery, poverty and oppression of the vast majority of humankind. In the feudal system, the slaves were iI/ treated, but they knew that they Were wanted. In the traditional caste organization, the outcastes discriminated; but they knew that they were wanted, and without them and their toil society could not function. But today the :~rst thing is happening with the globalization and market economy; the poor are told that they are not wanted and that they are a burden and that they are simply redundant. The cry of the poor is today breaking the heavens.

The poor were always the beloved of God as seen both in the Old and New Testaments. God always took the side of the poor and the victims of the society. Poverty, slavery and oppression are not willed by God; they are the consequences of human sin, and they are not compatible with Jesus' proclamation of the Kingdom of God, which called for radical conversion and the creation of a new society with justice, freedom, equality and love for all. The Church and theology today, therefore, have to take an unambiguous option for the poor, and to listen to their cry (Ecclesia in Asia, 34).

Liberation theologians today speak of the epistemological privilege of the poor. It means that as God is present and active in a special way among the poor and that they are the beloved of God, and as the poor totally depend on God's benevolence, they have a better chance to know more about God; they have the privilege to be with God and to know God. Therefore, God speaks today in a very special way through the cry of the poor, their struggles, aspirations, visions and hopes, and theology should specially attend to them along with the other historical sources of Christian theology as mentioned in this chapter.

Questions for review

 (1) The Faith-experience of the earliest Christian community is the primary source of theology. Does this statement tally with the notion that Revelation and Faith are the sources and foundations of theology?

(2) What were the issues in focus during the historical debate On the sources of theology? Does theology have one, or two, or three sources?

(3) What are the respective roles of the Magisterium. the sensus  fidelium and the theologians in the theologizing process, and     what exactly is the relationship among them?

(4) What is the basis for the distinction between Sources and Resources in theology? Do you think that such a distinctIon is valid?

(5) What are the attitudes and approaches of the Church today towards other cultures and religions? Do you notice any significant change in this regard?

List of selected books

Catechism of the Catholic Church, (Bangalore: Theological publications in India, 1994).

DULLES, Avery, Models of Revelation, (New York: Doubleday, 1983).

FISCHER, Kathleen & HART, Thomas, Christian FoundationS         (New York: Paul ist Press, 1986).

KUENG, Hans, On Being a Christian, (New York: Doubleday,          1976).

NEUNER, J. & DUPUIS, J. (eds.), The Christian Faith, (Bangalore: TPI, 2001) (Seventh Edition).

RAHNER, Karl, Foundations of Christian Faith, (London: DL T, 1978).

SCHREITER, Robert J., Constructing Local Theologies, (Orbis          Books, 1985).

VATICAN II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, 1963.

VA TI CAN II, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, 1965.

VATICAN II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, 1964.

V A TICAN II, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, , 1965.

CHAPTER III

DEVELOPMENT AND PLURALISM IN THEOLOGY: A HISTORICAL OUTLINE

A. PLURALISM AND RELATIVISM

Given the fact that Catholic theology is, in the final analysis, a human attempt to articulate a response to God's self-communication in Jesus Christ, the enterprise itself is hemmed in by two polarities: The d,imension of mysteiY (God cannot be comprehended) and the dimension ofmediatiQ,k1 (God has freely communicated God's Self). As a consequence, theology, unlike most other sciences, does not proceed from definitions, since concepts abstracted from this world are not applicable, at least directly, to the mystery of God's self­ communication. Religious language affirms God,,,but does..notclaiHit to comprehend H~II), exce.pt insofar as .Be-has revea,led Hjmsj~~. The function of religious language, generally speaking, should not be envisaged as one of mirroring the mystery, put mtIlt>,]'. as 'poi~t<Mf languags - along the lines of analogy and metaphor.

Catholic, Theology i~ therefore, a unitary enterprise, but open to a variety of possible realization.§. It is ope,n to. div~rsi~, not only as regards the specific focus of Catholic theological reflection, viz. the subject matter of its consideration, its themes, etc., but also as regards the manner in which that content is embodied and expressed.

The following core issues can be singled out as constituting the seedbed from which the multiple forms of Catholic Theology spring:

Ø    The possibility of different emphases regarding the Understanding of the Catholic theological enterprise; or in other Words, what commonly goes under the name ()f Flwdame.nt£Jj Theologies"

Ø    Th~ possibilit~ ~f  different emphases re~arding the Use and role of philosophy within theology, or Speculative Theologies.

. The possibility of different emphases regarding the rOle accorded to Sacred Scripture in Catholic theological reflection. The whole gamut of what are called Biblical Theologies.

Ø  The possibility of different emphases regarding the role Tradition plays in Catholic theological reflection - Magisterial Theologies.

Ø  The variety of issues posed by the different contexts to which the theologies in question are trying to respond - Contextual Theologies.

Consequently, within the parameters of the Catholic theological enterprise, specific theologies can assume different contours depending on the thrust pre-set for the theological elaboration. This pre-set goal is not to be understood merely in terms of the subjective aim of the person, who is theologising, but in the way the theological model itself has been articulated, and the different factors mentioned above have been integrated and interrelated. This accounts for a certain legitimate pluralism in Catholic Theology, which, far from constituting a drawback, is to be seen as something positive.

Pluralism, as explained above, should be clearly distinguished from relativism. Relativism maintains that one can only reach approximations, not the truth; it holds that there is no one truth, but only 'what is apparent', 'what seems true' from a particular perspective. Among these perspectives, there is what' others' consider right, and what 'we' consider right. This passes and is accepted as the truth by the particular person or groups concerned. Fundamentally, such an attitude denies both the existence of any deeper unity underlying the diversity of expressions, and the

possibility of its attainment. In its core, it tends to be a negation of realism.

""'"--­

This exposition is epochal in its presentation, inasmuch as it ses on five eras which have concretely marked the history of ~~~oIOgy: the Biblical, the. Patristic, the Scholastic, the Post­ Scholastic and the Contemporary, the last of which has been styled: contextual. The presentation, further, limits itself to the common heritage of Christianity and subsequently, to the Roman Catholic strand in theological reflection.

B. THEOLOGIES IN THE BIBLE

When Catholics speak of the Bible being divinely inspired, they usually refer to a twofold 'authorship', divine and Imman, not in the sense that God .dictated the Bible literally to human copyists, but that the composition of the biblical books by human authors was part of God's special providence, so that the Old Testament and the New Testament might articulate revelation and provide lasting guidance to God's people. In the words ofthe Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation of Vatican II: "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while He employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though He acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever He wanted written, and no more." (DV, 11).

Given this active role of God in the production of the Scriptures, one is in a position to understand that, beyond the "literal sense" intended and conveyed by the human authors, there could be a fuller sense intended by God.

The Bible is a library, a collection of books and consequently of theologies. For instance, in the Hebrew Scriptures, (the Old Testament), one can find a Yahwist Theology, an Elohist Theology, a Priestly Theology, a Oeuteronomic Theology and Wisdom Theologies, to name but a few. These theologies are different, reflect different concerns and even different cultures as Israel moved from an agrarian society to a monarchy, from an independent state to becoming a vassal of Assyria, Greece and Rome. The Old Testament is a collection of 46 books.

.l

Likewise, the New Testament is a collection of 27 bOOks written at different periods at different places. The awareness of God's self-communication in history in Jesus Christ is reflected 01] in the course of the New Testament writings; and one can trace the development of the growing realization of the Christ event in its

implications.

It is obvious then that one must read the New Testament with a certain sense of chronology. One needs to keep in mind that throughout the first century of our era, not only does one find salvifi~ acts in the true and proper sense, and revelations that are constitutive for Christianity, but also a root theological model that will serve as paradigm for all theological reflections of subsequent centuries.

         These two factors separated the Apostolic Age clearly from later periods in the history of Christianity, during which the work of the Holy Spirit is not understood as a new revelation, but as an assimilation, a personalization of God's revelation in Christ.

Christians of the year 35 AD had one way of understanding; years later they grew in their realization and amplified it. For this very reason, the theologies of the various communities and the inspired writers of the Apostolic Church do not always manifest a gradual, logical, orderly progress. One community may have been theologicalIy more advanced in the fifties than another several decades later. Each gospel is different because of the different circumstances in which each was written, each reflecting the concerns of quite different Christian communities.

Paradoxically, one can speak of the Gospels as developing backwards. The most ancient Christian preaching about Jesus was the core proclamation - the Death and Resurrection of Christ: Acts 2,23.32; 3,14-15; 4,10; 10,39- 40; 1 Cor 15,3 - .4. These events constituted, for the disciples, the clearest instance of God's salvation in Jesus. Furthermore, it was through them that the disciples came to a more adequate understanding of who Jesus really was. This preaching eventually became an account of the Passion, which constituted  the oldest consecutive narrative about Jesus - the Passion Narrative.

However, Christian proclamation also turned its attention to the deeds and words that came down to it from the tradition of Jesus'

ministry. The Evangelists drew on them in composing accounts of the ministry of Jesus. The arrangement of the ministry material in the Gospels was logical rather than chronological.

The written Gospels emerged from the prefixing of the ministry material to the passion accounts. The oldest example, the Gospel of  Mark, starts with the encounter of Jesus and John the Baptist as the "beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Mk 1, I); and it term inates with the angelic roclamation of the Resurrection at the empty tomb (Mk 16, I - 8). Mark tells the reader nothing about Jesus' birth or youth.

In such a process of Gospel  rmation, the selection of the material and emphases were dictated by the fact that a message of salvation was being preached and taught. The Gospels tend to be anecdotal rather than biographical. Place and time indications are generalIy infrequent, vague and  sometimes conflicting. The order of events too, as regards details, tends to vary from Gospel to Gospel. They express not merely objective history (what takes place), but the religious significance of these events (what goes on in what takes place). They are history interpreted through faith.

At the beginning of the second century, when the last of the New Testament writings had been completed, Christian theological thought was already mature. It had clearly distanced itself from the Jewish context in which it had arisen and it had acquired an autonomous dynamism.

If we view the New Testament as the articulation by the first believers of their experience of the supreme saving act of God in Jesus, we are in a position to understand why the narrative of the activity, sayings, death and resurrection of Jesus comes first. These narratives are simple accounts of "the events that have occurred among us" (Lk 1, I).

II

The positive response to these events, or to their proclamation is then spelt out, using categories then current; and one find' 'confessions of faith', that is, short 'pithy' formulations of th~ believers' salvific experience in Christ. In course of time, these confessions were elaborated in the forro of the various letters and also in the Gospels.

Furthermore, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, God constantly worked new miracles in the growing Church: the conversion of the non-Jews, charisms, etc. All this heightened a new awareness (and caused new problems) that required further theological reflection and elaboration.

At this point, believers began to ask themselves whether their salvific experiences and the formulations of their faith were in continuity with the experiences and formulations of the Jewish people in the past. In other words, there was the need to situate themselves vis-a-vis the Jewish experience of God and its elaboration. Their answer to this question can be seen in the numerous Old Testament citations and allusions in the New Testament writings.

However, the response to the kerygma found expression, not only in confessions of faith, but in a way of life and a form of worship, as one can see from the exhortatory and liturgical texts found in the different New Testament writings.

This community, now distinct from Judaism, developed a specific self-awareness and tried to express its unique experience. And with this self-understanding, she justified, herself, in the first place, against all outsiders, both Jews and gentiles, and then even against those believers, who, misunderstood the Christian proclamation and unduly tampered with the Christian self-understanding.

Finally, the New Testament writings expressed the Church's .in the final saving act of God at the end of time.

         consequently, in the New Testament, it is not illogical to speak fa Matthean theology, a Marcan theology, a Lucan theology and a ~ohannine theology. Training the focus further, within the writings of specific New Testament authors such as, for instance, Paul, with reference to his reflection on Christ, one can speak of an Ascending Christology (or a theological reflection on Jesus Christ which stresses His humanity), a Descending Christo logy (or a theological reflection on Christ which begins from His divinity) and a Cosmic Christology (or a theological reflection on Christ linking Him to the entire universe). A similar difference in emphasis can be found in the New Testament with respect to other aspects of the Christian mystery.

Summing up the entire process, the focus of the New Testament is always the proclamation of the Christ event. In elaborating this proclamation, however, theological reflection followed diverse paths, depending both on the personality and cultural identity of the New Testament authors, and the circumstances of the communities they were addressing. But beneath it all, the theologies in the Bible kept a delicate balance between maintaining the single focus - Christ, and allowing a legitimate pluralism of expression, each of which represents one of the two facets of the Christian faith: on the one hand, its uniqueness and, on the other, the multiplicity of ways in which it can be legitimately expressed.

C. THE ERA OF THE FATHERS OF THE

                           CHURCH

1. Introductory Remarks

The title Father of the Church has been commonly used to designate the ecclesiastical writers of antiquity - ordinarily bishops . who died in the faith and communion with the Church. According to some modern patrologists, the title applies only to those writers who have the following qualifications: soundness of doctrine holiness of life, ecclesiastical endorsement and antiquity. Froll1 ~ practical point of view, however, it has been given even to others who do not possess the first three requisites, as for instance, Origen  and Tertullian (cf. TIXERONT-RAEMERS, A Handbook of Patrology, New York 1943, 2). The patristic era is commonly understood as extending from the apostolic period to the middle of the VIII century.

2. Characteristics of this Period

It is important to call to mind the challenges facing the Infant Church in the centuries, which followed the apostolic period. Christians had to elaborate a theological vocabulary to protect the integrity of the Church's faith. In this context one can distinguish three types of dialogue:

Ø The first may be termed Apologetic. Technically. an apology was a formal statement made before a judge on behalf of a defendant. The Apologists were the first Fathers of the Church to write in defence of Christianity. Most of these writings were attempts to obtain from the emperors the official recognition of the rights of Christians to practise their religion publicly.

Ø The second phase of dialogue - the Do~matic Deriod~ad as its primary concern, the need to understand the faith in the context of its own inner dynamism.

Ø Finally, there was the Theological phase, marked by the emergence of Christian systems of theology. It must be admitted, however, that there was a certain inevitable overlapping of the concerns of each period.

3. The Division of this Period

The criteria suggested for the division of the patristic period are manifold. One commonly accepted division demarcates the era into:

Ø  The period of the Apostolic FathersL whose concerns were rnainly 'pastoral, didactic and exhortatory (e.g. Clement of Rome, IgnatiuS and Polycarp);

Ø  The Apologists, who wrote in defence of Christianity (Justin, IrenaeuS- and Clement of Alexandria), and tried to initiate a dialogue betWeen Christianity and secular culture.

Since this encounter of the Gospel with the secular assumed many forms in diverse contexts, there were many ram ifications in this sector:

Ø  Initially, the Gospel encountered the Semitic world and retained many of the Semitic perspectives in Christian theology. This thrust spread throughout the regions of Syria and Mesopotamia, and had its centre at Edessa. Ephraem the Syrian, with his symbolic approach to theological reflection, stands out as an eminent proponent of this early Syriac Christian model of theological reflection.

Ø  The encounter of the Gospel with the Greek World, instead, had its focal point in Alexandria, with Clement of Alexandria, Origen and others. This approach touched its highpoint in the Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory Nazianzen, Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa).

Ø  Finally, it was at Rome and Carthage that Christianity encountered Latin culture - an approach, whose early proponents include Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian. This process was consolidated, above all, by Ambrose of Milan and Augustine of Hippo.

4. Key Theological Developments of this Period

a) The Fixing of the New Testament Canon

From the very outset, Christian theology recognized itself as being grounded in Sacred Scripture. During the patristic period, one notices a process of decision-making in which limits were laid down to the New Testament - the fixing of the Canon. The Church thereby recogmze certam wntmgs as aposto IC an ac now e ged thel11 Jregulating her life and faith. Consequently, it was not that an aCt as the Church authenticated what was apostolic, but rather, what ",Of apostolic was received and interpreted authentically by the Church.

b) The Role of Tradition

Tradition came to mean 'a traditional interpretation of Scripture' or 'a traditional presentation ofthe Christian faith', which is reflected in the creeds of the Church, its liturgy and doctrinal pronouncements. Tradition was recognized as a legacy frol11 the apostles by which the Church was guided toward a correct interpretation of Sacred Scripture. In the context of his refutation of Gnosticism, a heresy that borrowed doctrines from the Christian faith, making a mishmash of them, Irenaeus states: "The true Gnosis is the teaching of the Twelve Apostles" (Contra Haereses, II 25). Irenaeus strongly insists on the role oftradition in helping the Church remain faithful to the apostolic witness.

c) The Fixing of the Ecumenical Creeds

Creeds were official summaries of the Christian faith. These ranged from the Baptismal professions of faith and the Apostles' Creed, to the formalized creeds articulated by Ecumenical Councils, such as the Nicene Creed and the Constantinopolitan Creed. The development of these creeds was an important element in the movement toward achieving a doctrinal consensus within the early Church.

d) A Deeper Understanding of the Person of Jesus Christ

This period also saw the elaboration o~a dogmatic framework with a view to a better understanding of the person of Jesus Christ.

A major milestone in this regard was the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451).

An important factor, which stimulated this process of clarification was the theological (at times polemical), interaction larlll ' C een the two schools of theology, the Alexandrian and the ~e:;ochene, based respectively at Alexandria and Antioch.

The Alexandrian school, one of whose illustrious epresentatives was Cyril of  Alexandria, focused on the divinity of ~esus Christ and tended to downplay His humanity. Instead, the Antiochenes, for example, Theodore of Mopsuestia, while asserting the full humanity of Jesus Christ tended to loosen His union with the divinity.

e) A Difference in Approaches to the Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity was slowly clarified during this era. The main thrust of the Trinitarian debates focused on the manner in which the Trinity was to be understood, rather than the basic val idity of the mystery. The Trinitarian faith that was not only professed in the doxologies (prayers of praise), but also lived, was fundamentally the same both in the East and in the West. There were, however, differences in approach in the theological articulation ofthe mystery.

The Latin Fathers, especially Augustine, first focused on the One God, and then situated the Godhead as three persons of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; whereas the Greek Fathers (the Cappadocians) began with the three persons of Father, Son and Spirit, whom they understood as one God.

F          ) A More Integral Understanding of the Church

In the immediate post-apostolic period, there was a twofold tradition in understanding the reality of the Church: the Pauline and the Johannine. The Pauline tradition emphasized the unity of all the local Churches in Christ, whereas the Johannine emphasized the reality and unity within the local Church. In lrenaeus, one observes a convergence of the two traditions - the Asiatic Johannine and the Roman Pauline. This period also saw the rise of the five patriarchates: Rome, A lexandria, Antioch, Constantinople and Jerusalem.

g) The Implications of Sacramentality

There was the growing realization that the effectiveness of Church's ministry did not depend on the holiness of the minist the but upon the person of Jesus Christ. This awareness had a d:rs, impact upon Christian reflection on the nature of the Church and hep ministry. In the controversy with the Donatists who required that t~r minister of the sacrament be holy, Augustine had this to say: "Thee do not distinguish the 'sacrament' from the 'use of the sacramen/ 'Not receiving a sacrament' is different from 'not receiving ~ sacrament well'.          

h) The Doctrine of Grace

The priority of the grace of God at every stage of human life was strongly insisted upon during this period, largely due to the interve,ntion of Augustine against Pelagius. Pelagius considered grace, and more basically, the need for Jesus Christ, as something dispensable required only by sinners.

i) The Beginnings of the Science of Biblical Interpretation

Already in Origen, one observes an attempt to formulate principles for interpreting the Bible (Biblical Hermeneutics). True, the literal truth of Sacred Scriptures was beyond all discussion. However, the literal meaning itself was held to be twofold: the corporeal sense and the allegorical sense; the former referred to the grammatical sense. The general rule was that the corporeal sense must be discarded whenever it concluded to something impossible, absurd or unworthy of God; in which case, the allegorical interpretation should be used.

j) The Relationship between Christian Theology and Secular Culture

During thi s epoch, there was a creative interaction of Christian theology, liturgy and spirituality with the cultural traditions of the ancieJ1.t world. Justin, for one, elaborated an ingenious theological synthesis adoPting the key category of logos, used both by Stoic Hy to express the presence of the divine in the world and by the Evangelist John to charactenze the Son of God. Other Fathers made the other methodological options, such as Neoplatonic philosophy.

[113 eO

k) Initial Attempts at situating Reason vis-it-vis Faith

It was at the school of Caesarea, in Cappadocia, made famous b Origen that the spirit of philosophical speculation entered the t:eologies of the three great Cappadocians: Gregory Nazianzen, Basil  of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa.

In the cOQtext of the encroachment of the field of faith by dialectical reasoning, Gregory Nazianzen forcefully stressed the primacy of faith. He did not renounce the right to n)ake use of rational arguments, but he wanted to use them in accordance with the teaching of the Christian faith. Faith was an invitation to bow to mystery, and the use, which one made of philosophical terms in order  to define it, should not involve replacing faith with understanding. Basil, in his turn, asserted that to submit a mystery to dialectical reasoning was self-contradictory. One who esteemed dialectics as the

supreme rule of human thought had no business to be a theologian, nor for that matter, a Christian. However Basil himself used dialectics in order to define with precision the object of Christian faith.

I) The Emergence of Schools of Theology

There was the burgeoning ofthe first schools Mtheology during this age, for instance the Alexandrian and the Antiochene schools mentioned above. Similarly, one notices certain common perceptions and methodological options in elaborating a theology, which st311 typifying both the Greek and the Latin approaches. This process gains consistency during the onset of the patristic era.

D. SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGIES

1. Situating the Scholastic era

            Scholasticism is the common epithet used to describe the' Scholastic Philosophy' of the Faculties of Arts and the 'Scholastic Theology' of the Faculties of Theology In me leval Western tl Ie It refers to a particular way of organizing the philosoPhica~roPe. theological enterprises. At that time, the word 'universtl]~ (universitas) originally referred to the entire group of masters ty students residing in some town. They followed a welJ-defil~l]d

curriculum of studies. The two chief methods of teaching were lectures and disputations.

2. Historical Antecedents

In order to better understand this new approach to theology, it needs to be situated historically. At the beginnings of Christianity, theological reflection took place in a Jewish milieu and its proponents used Semitic categories of expression, which were basically functional in character. 

However, this approach radically changed when Christianity  encountered Greek culture. Christian thinkers eventually began to realize that they could neither proclaim, nor defend their faith without taking into account the categories of the dominant culture.  But even so, by and large, reflection on the Christ event was never a pure exercise in speculation. It always took place within the faith context and from the perspective of salvation - an attitude aptly summed up by Augustine in the adage: Believe that you may understand.

But then, a far-reaching shift took place when the doctrine of the Greek philosopher Aristotle reached the confines of Western Europe. The new way of thinking displayed in these writings posed a formidable challenge to the biblical vision. Christian thinkers were compelled to go beyond the Scriptural categories of thought and formulate in a precise and technical manner the truth that Sacred SGfipture hadexp!:essed in concrete ,S,..YJTIbolic terjTIs. In this perspective, the significance of realitY-was expressed not in function~, but in ontological.y:erms. The focus of reflection was gradually shifted from the plane of actio!] to the plane ofbei'lf' poor.

  This approac~l was not without its ~roblem~. It tended to make  Christian reflectIOn abstrac:r; technKal.notion replaced the immediacy which had always characterized Scriptural expressions. The  d ynamic categories of Scripture were replaced by theoretical The ~t must be affirmed, nonetheless, that, to a certain extent, this ter~s~as inevitable. Controversy within and outside the Church 5h~erscored the need to confront the question of truth. Obviously, ~nnctional categories alone were unable to deal with this issue. ;herefore, there was a crying need for a 'second order' of reflection in order to clarify and defend the faith.

Consequently, Christian thinkers had to confront, and, to some extent, accept the Greek philosophical approach, but this acceptance remained, by and large, cosmetic - at the level of logic alone – and initia\1y tended to ignore the various metaphysical issues that Greek philosophy raised.

It was the thinkers of the Middle Ages in Western Europe who dealt with, and eventually integrated, this dimension into Christian reflection.

Aristotelian metaphysics envisage.d what-can be.. caUed naturalistic view of reality. According to this vision,,1be.G.osmosiad an inj:ernal consistencx of its oWll It was visualized as a hierarchy of beil1lgs, having their own natures or intrinsic principfes of intelligibility ,and oJ'eratio~ which the human mind could both grasp and classify; it could understand the cosmos .in terms .QLits cau~s, interrelationships and goetis.

On the one hand, the curiosity that this startling awareness unleashed and the .:.de,ep confidence that hl}manre.as.OI:!1could understand this world and its processes - all had their impact on theological reflection. But, on the other hand, Aristotle was also treated with deep suspicion, since his naturalistic outlook seemed to clash with the Christian view, which understood reality as completely and always dependent on God. This was the era of classical Scholasticism.

It is generally customary to divide the scholastic era into fI periods: Pre-scholasticism (800 AD - 1050 AD), Early Scholastici~l!t (1050 AD - 1200 AD), High Scholasticism (1200 AD - 1350 AD~ and Late Scholasticism (1350 AD - 1500 AD).       '

Among the focal issues, which figured on the scenario during this period, two can be pinpointed:

1. The Role of Reason in Theology

The new concern to establish Christian theology upon a totally reliable foundation led to a deeper exploration of the role of reason in theology, a core characteristic of Scholasticism.

2. The Development of Theological Systems

There was a pressure to consolidate the patristic heritage; this pressure to systematize which was part and parcel of the Scholastic mindset, led to the development of the sophisticated theological systems which Etienne Gilson calls: 'cathedrals of the mind'. This expressed itself in two directions: .ther~r9s~ the..need J9_sY;;1el11at~ze

~~d~,::5p~nd_Christia!) theolqg_and,tl1.~ need t.o, d}lm°IJ.~t~ate .1!le liitelligihilityof that theolo..gy. These systems had twb main emphases: the 'primac~ of the intellect over the wiJ:b (e.g. Thomas Aquinas), or on the other hand, the primacy of the will over the intellect (e.g. Bonaventure). Thus the stage was set for the era of the schools: Thomism, Scotism, and Ockhamism etc.

In order to savour the theological mood, which pervaded this exuberant phase in the history of Christian theology in the West, this presentation briefly describes some of the key trends, which characterized the theology of this period; each of these trends is exemplified in the doctrine of a prominent theologian of the time.

3. Faith and Reason: Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)

One of the luminaries of this period was Anselm of Canterbury, whose work Monologiul11 is a profound and prayerful study on the existence and nature of God, yet professedly based on the authority 101 fScriptUre. Anselm clearly affirmed faith as his starting point, but 0 vertheless, through reason, sought 'to understand' what he believed ~e'a faith seeking understanding' (Fides quaerens intellectum).      

Anselm tried to analyse and prove the truths of faith by reason.It was his goal to go beyond mere faith and arrive at an insight intofaith. Eventually, in the sc~le of v~lues tha~ ~le elabo~at~d, faithoccupied the lowest place; 111 the mIddle positIOn was l11s1ght intofaith which is attainable in this life, and enables one to draw closerto the beatific vision of God; whereas the beatific vision itself issituated at the top of the scale.

From this insight into faith, Anselm expected the believer to savour a certain joy in the spiritual beauty of the truths of faith. Furthermore, he was convinced that, by showing the reasonableness and necessity of these truths, one was actual:y defending them against those who either argued against or rejected them. He extended this even to include specifically revealed doctrines such as those of the Trinity, Incarnation and Redemption.

The procedure that he followed, of disregarding all authority in the course of his inquiry was, for Anselm, only a methodological strategy in order to demonstrate that faith was reasonable. On the personal level, far from being a rational ist, in the event of a clash between Sacred Scripture and proofs from reason, he emphatically held the former to be correct. This stance is endorsed by the fact that he submitted certain of his works to the judgement of the Pope and was ready in every respect to retract anything in which he had been proven to be in error. Anselm, nevertheless, demanded both firmness in faith and philosophical preparation in everyone who embarked on the theological enterprise.

Anselm has been called the father of Scholasticism. He was among the first in Western Europe to give theology that specific character of dialectical thoroughness, which transformed it into a kind of science.      (TILL PAGE 101)