When the Lord stood before Pontius Pilate to be judged by the worldly ruler, Jesus declared the reason for the Incarnation: “For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice” (Jn. 18:37, ESV). To Corinth, Paul wrote that if the doctrine of the resurrection is false, then “we are of all people most to be pitied” (1 Cor. 15:19). With such statements and many others like them, the Bible witnesses to the incomparable value of pursuing truth.
As we engage in the theological/dogmatic task, we must pursue character at the same time we pursue proclamation. Two weeks ago, we looked to Gregory of Nazianzus who instructs us to maintain reverence as we contemplate, discuss, teach, and debate theology. This week, we look to the great Western church father, Augustine of Hippo.
In his book De Trinitate, or “On the Trinity,” Augustine presents the doctrine of the Trinity with such beauty, clarity, and insight that what he said would impact theological construction from his time to today. He names the Spirit “Love” and “Gift” and posits what has been called the psychological analogy of the Trinity, contemplating memory (memoria), intellect/knowledge (intellegentia), and will (voluntas) as an analogy through which we can think about God. Before engaging in such enrapturing written contemplation, Augustine urges his reader to most value truth.
In Book I, Augustine addresses his reader directly, laying out the spirit in which he engages in this most daunting of tasks. He sets the parameters, arguing that we should neither look to the created material world, nor the created immaterial world, nor something completely lacking analogy in creation. Instead, with faith as our starting point, we must look to God’s revelation in Scripture articulated through creational language for the sake of drawing us to he who is beyond creation. It is a fool’s errand to attempt to pursue God based on our own experience or our own reason. Still, in the manner of credo ut intelligam (I believe in order to understand) and fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding), he believes we can give a reasonable explanation of the things we believe. Augustine, therefore, places this quest for truth in the context of piety: “the due observance of piety makes the ailing mind well for the perception of unchanging truth, and saves it from being plunged into opinions of a noisome falsehood by the random whims of temerity” (I.2,4). In this way, Augustine advocates for the same spirit as Gregory.
He continues, however, in a formal agreement (placitum) with his reader to pursue truth together. In his agreement with the reader, Augustine raises a series of conflicts that may arise between them. First, the reader may fail to understand what Augustine has said, which could be because Augustine does not state it as well as others or because the reader is incapable of understanding the content no matter who says it. If it is the former case, Augustine says they should put his book down and take up the clearer work/treatment so long as the content is the same. He admits others may have written better, but that does not make his work pointless since others may come across his writings instead of the writings of those whom the objector finds clearer. If someone does not understand what Augustine or anyone else has said on the topics he addresses, the reader should give himself to improving his ability rather than blaming Augustine. In this way, we read Augustine setting an example of humility as he seeks to propagate the truth. He does not claim to be the only authority on whatever he speaks about. If someone else provides the same content in a form that is clearer to his readers, he is more than willing to have his readers put his work aside and embrace the other. Similarly, we will strive to propagate the truth in ways that are clear and compelling, but we also recognize that others have said things clearer and more compelling than we can. We aim to declare the truth to the best of our ability for those who happen to come across our work.
Second, the reader may understand Augustine but believe that he is wrong in what he says. If the reader can charitably show that he is wrong, Augustine asks the reader to correct him. If Augustine has already died, he would like such a reader to correct him (Augustine) to others. What he does not want for himself or others is to embrace falsehood, which Augustine actively tries to resist by meditation on Scripture, writing down correct thoughts for the sake of permanence, and trusting God’s preservation of him in truth through reminders brought to mind, reading the Scriptures, and conversations with believers. Similarly, we pray that in any place where we err, our readers will gently demonstrate to us that we are in the wrong if they can so we can amend our thoughts or our expressions. We desire that God would preserve us by his Word and Spirit.
Third, the reader may misunderstand Augustine and react in one of two ways. Before addressing the two reactions, Augustine reminds his readers that he should not be blamed for others’ misunderstandings just as the prophets and apostles’ should not be blamed for the misunderstandings of heretics. Still, the two reactions are either that one misunderstands him and thinks he is wrong, and therefore seeks to censure him, or one misunderstands him and thinks he is right, and therefore seeks to praise him. Though nobody desires to be misunderstood, Augustine says he prefers the first reaction over the second since the first reaction has embraced the truth and simply mistook Augustine for stating a falsehood while the second has embraced a falsehood and mistook Augustine for stating a truth. He would rather his readers affirm the truth they think he missed than wrongly praise him for affirming their erroneous views. Likewise, while we would prefer people understand what we have said when we speak truth, if they do misunderstand what we say, we desire that they dismiss what they thought was error rather than praise us in the midst of their errors.
Christians must prize the truth above all, even above our own name. In a world that continually values recognition over reality, we must be those who conscientiously exalt truth even when it does not increase our status. At Baptist Dogmatics, we are not claiming to be the only guardians of truth, nor the clearest expositors of it. Rather, we believe that we have the responsibility before God and in our own consciences to promote the truth to the best of our ability. We aim to engage the task with reverence and humility. Like our Lord, the apostles, the prophets, and countless others through the church’s history, we do not believe humility means uncertainty or postmodern subjectivism; it means that truth is objectively defined by God in his Word, and we must submit to it. We must be willing to be corrected by his Word, and at the same time, we must not cower before those who simply disagree. If you, our readers and listeners, find error in what we say, and if you can point it out to us, please do. However, if your disagreement is with the truth, we will not, indeed we must not, bend or bow.