Is theology a theoretical discipline dedicated to mere contemplation? Or, is theology practical and, if so, how? In this article, we hope to show that dogmatics is an inseparable mix of theoretical and practical theology, leading us to identify it as a theoretical-practical discipline. Before doing so, it might be helpful to contrast two contemporary evangelical definitions of theology with a definition from the seventeenth century.
Definition #1: “Systematic theology is any study that answers the question, ‘What does the whole Bible teach us today?’ about any given topic.”
Definition #2: “Theology is the application of the Word of God by persons to all areas of life.”
Definition #3: “The doctrine of living for God through Christ.”
The first definition rightly grasps the comprehensive and unified nature of the theological task as well as its abiding relevance for the church in all ages. However, it appears to neglect the God-centered nature of theology, which essentially understands theology as the study of God and all things in relation to God. Even if one should come to grasp what all of Scripture says about a given topic, the relationship between the theoretical and the practical is unclear at best and missing at worst.
The second definition rightly grasps the practical nature of theology, the centrality of the Word of God, the normative nature of Scripture, the universality of theology, and its relevance to life. However, it may move too quickly from Scripture to life application and might bypass contemplation of God, turning our eyes down toward the created order and away from the One who exists in and for Himself. It risks making man, rather than God, the end of theology.
The third definition comes from Petrus van Mastricht’s work, Theoretical-Practical Theology, and will be the focus of the remainder of this article.
Van Mastricht arrives at this definition of theology from passages such as 1 Timothy 6:2-3, which reads, “Teach and preach these principles. If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing.” Van Mastricht discerns a twofold element in the theological task: teach and preach. Teaching informs the intellect as to what is true while preaching implies exhortation and seeks to move the will such that it carries forth what is perceived in the intellect as true, good, and beautiful.
True doctrine follows a pattern of sound words while false doctrine departs from the God-ordained pattern of dogmatics. In doing so, false doctrine does not conform to godliness, an essential quality of the doctrine Paul commands Timothy to teach and preach. Sound doctrine produces those who live to God in Christ Jesus (Rom 6:11) because they have received the words of life (Acts 5:20). Van Mastricht concludes, “Therefore, it appears that Christian theology is best defined as the doctrine of living for God through Christ,” (Theoretical-Practical Theology, I.66). His definition rightly orients all of life to God, which maintains the theoretical-practical nature of theology.
Francis Turretin appears to be a theological ally with van Mastricht at this point as both criticize those who treat theology as merely theoretical or merely practical. Merely theoretical disciplines end in contemplation, while merely practical disciplines end in operation. In theoretical disciplines, practice is accidental to its study. Metaphysics is a theoretical discipline since the study of free will and the nature of being do not necessarily move one to action even though these disciplines are worthy of our contemplation. By way of contrast, in practical disciplines, knowledge is accidental to its study. Ethics is a practical discipline since it terminates on a practice rather than in contemplation.
Theology cannot be merely a theoretical discipline, van Mastricht argues, since, “Salvation does not consist in knowledge alone, but in a knowledge that comes from love (John 17:3; 1 Cor. 13:13),” (Theoretical-Practical Theology, I.106). However, theology cannot be merely practical, Turretin notes, since, “The knowledge of mysteries is an essential part of it,” (Institutes, I.23). Turretin cites John 17:3 to argue that knowledge of God does not merely consist in knowledge of His will but also of His nature.
Both theologians agree that theology cannot be merely theoretical or merely practical but van Mastricht goes a step further and argues against theoretical & practical theology (note, the hyphen has been replaced by the ampersand). He says, “There are those who define theology as both theoretical and practical, since on its one side, that is, with reference to things that must be believed concerning God, the Trinity, the personal union of the two natures in Christ, it is theoretical only, but on the other side, concerning things that must be done, it is merely practical. But they do not make this designation carefully enough, because for theology, by its nature, to consist in contemplation and in addition, by its nature, to require practice, implies a contradiction,” (Theoretical-Practical Theology, I.106). Van Mastricht argues against those who claim theology contains merely theoretical parts and merely practical parts as if two can be separated from each other. On this view, one might claim that the doctrine of the Trinity commends our contemplation but does not lead to practice. Van Mastricht rejects this view as a contradiction since a discipline cannot be merely theoretical and merely practical. Instead, theology is an inseparable mix of theoretical and practical, leading van Mastricht to title his work, Theoretical-Practical Theology.
How do these mixed elements relate? As Turretin argued, theology requires knowledge of mysteries made known to creatures through special revelation. These mysteries relate to practice in two different ways: “There is no mystery proposed to our contemplation as an object of faith which does not excite us to the worship of God or which is not prerequisite for its proper performance,” (Institutes, I.21). These mysteries are not merely theoretical but either drive us to worship or govern how we live to God through Christ. God, as the object of theology, must be known to be worshiped and in knowing Him we come to enjoy Him.
Van Mastricht and Turretin stress that theology is theoretical-practical, yet they also emphasize that it is more practical, “and even preeminently practical,” (Theoretical-Practical Theology, I.107). However, it is not practical because one’s eyes are turned away from God in order to engage in practice toward another object; rather, it is practical with respect to its ultimate end as theology reaches its telos in love and worship of God.
We must maintain that dogmatics is a theoretical-practical discipline. The mysteries of the faith demand that we label theology a theoretical discipline and these very same mysteries, by which we know God, necessarily excite and govern our worship of God. Theology must also be labeled a practical discipline since, van Mastricht argues, “The practice we have proposed, living for God, is by far the most complete practice of all,” (Theoretical-Practical Theology, I.107).