Theological Epistemology

Studie se soustředí na problematiku mezikulturního a mezináboženského soužití a zkoumá, co v této oblasti může nabídnout teologie a její pohled na některé podstatné společenské otázky (obavy z proměn společnosti, kulturní a náboženské rozrůzněnosti, migrace). Autorka vymezuje v teologické perspektivě základní pojmy a paradigmata pro interpretaci vztahů mezi různými kulturami (kultura, náboženství, multikulturalita, interkulturalita, dialog) a zkoumá vliv klíčových kategorií křesťanské epistemologie (trojičně-christologická výpověď o transcendenci, práce s reciprocitou a dierencí ve vztahu, kategorie agapé a kenósis) na utváření etických pravidel mezikulturního a mezináboženského dialogu.

Theological education can no longer operate according to a modernistic epistemology if it is to equip students to minister in a postmodern world. This article explores the possibility of developing a theological epistemology which does not blindly reflect the presuppositions of either modernism or postmodernism. It is argued that the theological notions of faith, hope and love provide a unique approach to truth that frees theological epistemology from fideism, fundamentalism and triumphalism. Faith renders theological theories vulnerable to being challenged by experiences of lived-through reality and alternative interpretations of that reality, while hope sets truth within the context of critical transformational actions based on relational commitments marked by love. A meta-theoretical model for theological education is constructed to indicate how this epistemological approach may be realized in educational praxis.

This thesis examines Fr. William A. Van Roo's contribution to the wide field of theological reflection on the relationship between theological method and the religious experience of the theologian as believer. While the 'turn to experience' became a hallmark of theology after 1952, and much was written on the topic, no solid consensus emerged. The thesis concludes that Van Roo's contribution, which passes through his reflection on symbols and symbolizing, offers a synthesis of the important elements of the question, around which a consensus could be built.

Published from 1899 to 1950 the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique has long been considered the incarnation of conservative doctrinal positions. Revisiting articles that examine areas and methods of theology, such as the canon Albert Michel’s « Fondamentale ou générale (théologie) », Ambroise Gardeil’s « Lieux théologiques », Thomas Deman’s « Salamanque (théologiens de) », Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange’s « Thomisme » or even Yves Congar’s « Théologie », one in fact realizes the extent to which the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique actively contributed to the major epistemological debates and helped revitalize the field of contemporay catholic theology.

Publié de 1899 à 1950, le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique a longtemps été considéré comme l’incarnation de positions doctrinales conservatrices. À parcourir les articles qui traitent en son sein des domaines et des méthodes de la théologie, comme les articles « Fondamentale ou générale (théologie) » du chanoine Albert Michel, « Lieux théologiques » d’Ambroise Gardeil, « Salamanque (théologiens de) » de Thomas Deman, « Thomisme » de Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange ou encore « Théologie » d’Yves Congar, force est de constater que le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique a en réalité activement participé aux grands débats épistémologiques qui ont contribué à renouveler profondément le champ de la théologie catholique contemporaine.

One of the most colossal editorial undertakings was the publication, by the publishing house Letouzey and Ané, of the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (Dictionary of Catholic Theology). Covering more than half a century from 1899 to 1950, the fifteen tomes divided in thirty volumes, represent one of their most beautiful achievements. Successively headed by Abbots Alfred Vacant (1852-1901), Eugène Mangenot (1856-1922) and Émile Amann (1880-1948), the work was barely finished, such that Letouzey and Ané, from 1951, published the first of eighteen fascicles of the Tables générales, whose compilation, led by Canon Albert Michel (1877-1972), would require a further twenty years of work. Until 1972, the Tables générales represented a commendable insight, albeit measured, into the most recent themes of theological reflection, albeit progressive, aggiornamento, the effects of which this article attempts to quantify.
La publication du Dictionnaire de Théologie catholique par les éditions Letouzé et Ané constitue une œuvre colossale, étalée de 1899 à 1950 : 15 tomes répartis en 30 volumes. Le DThC a été successivement dirigé par Alfred Vacant (1852-1901), Eugène Mangenot (1856-1922) et Émile Amann (1880-1948). À peine le dernier fascicule était-il publié que l’éditeur offrait, en 1951, le premier des 18 fascicules des Tables générales dues au chanoine Albert Michel (1877-1972). Leur mise au point prit finalement une vingtaine d’années, jusqu’en 1972, et permit l’introduction, méritoire et mesurée, de thèmes nouveaux, récemment abordés par la recherche théologique, une sorte d’aggiornamento progressif du DThC, que cet article se propose d’étudier.

EDITORIAL: The renaissance in Post-Reformation Reformed Scholasticism continues apace in Jae-Eun Park’s study of the Puritan Stephen Charnock’s Christological basis of our knowledge of God. While Charnock was accused by an earlier generation of scholars of being rationalistic, dry, arid, and abstract, Park demonstrates that this theologian’s understanding of human knowledge of the divine has been misunderstood because assessments have been based upon only one of his works, to the exclusion of another that elaborates on a Christological epistemology. Specifically, Park elucidates Charnock’s three-tiered epistemology with its natural, legal, and evangelical bases for human knowledge of God. God is ultimately and most fully revealed (à la Hebrews 1) in Christ Jesus. Additionally, Christ’s actual work of redemption plays a significant role in how we understand who God is; and finally, one who is familiar with and senses the importance of Christ’s work of redemption (with all its epistemological implications) will appropriately love, honor, cherish, and worship the Triune God. What we discover is that once again there is a wealth of theological treasure in the Reformed Scholastic troves of yore.

One can discern passages in the writings of the Scholastic doctor Thomas Aquinas and the contemporary French phenomenologist Michel Henry which can be interpreted as putting forth very similar ways for grasping the existence of God. These "ways to God" can be fruitfully compared from the point of view of their philosophical starting points as well as of their consequences for theological epistemology. The purpose of the present essay is to pursue this comparative work and to see what philosophicaltheological fruit it can yield.

In his early works (1240-50), Albertus Magnus transforms and overturns Augustine’s anthropology of interiority, especially the doctrines of noetic illumination, memory, knowledge by assimilation to an interior object, and the soul’s natural place in the cosmos.  Three of the early Albert’s major works manifest distinct approaches to Augustine’s anthropology: the De Homine, the Commentary on the Sentences and the commentaries on Dionysius.  The critique of Augustinian interiority reaches a crescendo in the Dionysian commentaries.  Here, Albert offers a new Aristotelian-Dionysian synthesis that emphasizes the place of mediations, especially material creation and Scripture, in human cognition.

The doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture maintains that the meaning of Scripture is clear to those who are enlightened by the Holy Spirit through faith. But this definition provides no way to know whether one has true faith or has been so enlightened by the Holy Spirit, a problem accentuated by persistent disagreement among persons who claim to be Christians of good will. This is a specific instance of a more general problem afflicting "closed" theological epistemologies. This essay provides an exposition of Kevin Diller's synthesis of the "closed" theological epistemologies of Karl Barth and Alvin Plantinga and critiques it on phenomenological grounds. It then concludes with a phenomenologically redefined description of Christian faith which entails rejecting the doctrine of the claritas scripturae and motivates an "open" theological epistemology.

In this paper, presented at Reformation and Modernity conference, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest , November 17-18.11.2017 I am reviewing central themes of my dissertation on Martin Luther’s understanding of faith and reality between 1513 and 1521. I will examine especially the question of theological epistemology, i.e. how Luther understands faith as a cognition and what kind of cognition it is.

In this paper, I will discuss the relationship between religious faith and doubt. In contemporary religious epistemology, it has been customary to require religious faith to have high epistemic standards. This is in line with many creedal formulations, which typically underline that believers should have certainty (certitudo) in their faith. Nevertheless, in the theological literature, it is not uncommon that doubt and uncertainty are acknowledged as ordinary aspects of a life of faith. In the following, I analyze faith not in its ideal form but as it often appears in the lives of believers, investigating how the relationship between faith and certainty could be understood.

Is it even legitimate to talk about scriptural authority in the postmodern context where metanarratives are rendered obsolete; or, do we need to rely on a circular appeal to scripture to validate its own claims? This essay grapples with the issue of revisioning the scriptural authority by challenging the epistemic presuppositions of foundationalist and nonfoundationalist methods to construct a postfoundationalist conception through a dialectical interaction between these suppositions. This thesis will argue that while Wolfhart Pannenberg’s theological methodology confines the scope of propositional revelation to only history (manifestational revelation), Nicholas Wolterstorff’s Divine Discourse limits propositional revelation to only divine speech (nonmanifestational), by reading them dialectically, we can arrive at a viable postfoundationalist position that enables us to understand scriptural authority without succumbing to foundationalist or nonfoundationalist binary.

Critical realism (CR) has served as a benchmark in science-theology dialogue as a way of determining similar rational structures in these disciplines. One implication has been that Theology has a parallel form of verification to that of the natural sciences. However, defenders of CR in Theology have not clarified how this might be the case and so critics of CR have noted numerous alleged shortfalls in thinking of Theology
objectively from a pragmatist perspective. This paper describes some of these criticisms, especially the more nuanced perspective of J. Wentzel van Huyssteen, whose concern for hermeneutics and epistemology is well suited to CR. Taking several cues from the theory of retroduction in the work of philosopher of science Ernan McMullin and the philosopher theologian Bernard Lonergan, this paper proposes a more explanatory form of CR that takes hermeneutical issues seriously while also retaining a cognitive focus on judgment. It is the capacity to judge, in the form of verified theories in science and theological doctrines, where a true parallel exists between theology and the natural sciences. The paper ends by noting a number of themes in Lonergan's magnum opus, Method in Theology, where theological doctrines are capable of being explanatorily true whilst remaining subject to revision, analogous to the status of verified theories in the natural sciences.

Les sources antiques sont riches d’enseignements sur ce qui constitue le fondement, non seulement historique mais plus largement épistémologique, du droit canonique. Elles sont, en effet, composées et diffusées au moment où la tradition chrétienne émerge de la manière dont l’Église se rapporte à son origine pour élaborer des réponses créatives aux exigences de l’annonce de l’Évangile dans le monde des Ier au IIIe siècles.
Cette tradition, qui est fondamentalement kérygmatique en tant que transmission
de l’annonce du salut en Jésus-Christ, se manifeste sous une double dimension
à la fois théologique, relatif aux énoncés de foi, et canonique, relatif à l’unité institutionnelle de la communauté ecclésiale. Ces dimensions théologique et canonique accomplissent, chacune dans leur ordre, une fonction d’ajustement par rapport à l’événement du salut actualisé dans l’annonce et la réception de l’Évangile.

General revelation is used by Paul to show why all people stand under the judgement and anger of God. In this article I plead for an expansion of Neil Ormerod's metaphysical transcendent epistemological frame to include a theological immanent epistemological frame. The rational metaphysical conversion that Ormerod pleads for is shown to be inadequate. To speak meaningfully of the God, a second repentance, which Ormerod develops in his theological hermeneutics, is required, namely a repentance from sin. An epistemology grounded on ontology is hereby replaced by an epistemology grounded on theology, anthropology and hamartiology. Humanity's sinful response to general revelation is understood as her unwillingness to place herself at the mercy of a God who is radically different from this reality. The article calls for agnosticism regarding God and the embracing of despair in the light of the human longing for an alternative reality. The transcendent God, it is argued, can only be reached by first embracing the salvation-historical interpretive framework offered in the canonical tradition. General revelation may still be used as a believing reinterpretation of nature, not only in terms of what creation is, but also in terms of what it should become.

This chapter will attempt to demonstrate the contradictions of the following statements affirmed by transhumanism:

1) Transhumanism and the Singularity event are the best hope for the survival of the human person; and
2) Transhumanist epistemology does not allow for a genuine or concrete understanding of what makes a person a person.

Once this has been accomplished, these ideas will be briefly contrasted with classic Christian epistemology and the certain understanding of the person, with particular focus on the image of God in humanity, and redemption by Christ.

Pages 19-36.

This article contends that truth is trinitarian and that theology ought to treat epistemology existentially. To demonstrate this, a brief historical study is conducted on the development of the concept of truth and how different approaches revolve around the definitions of truth as ἀλήθεια, veritas, and ‫ת‬ ‫מֶ‬ ‫.אֱ‬ Even though these words translate the same in English, historically each one discloses different angles of truth. By emphasizing one of the definitions in detriment of others, it is argued that truth has been fragmented in distinct concepts apparently opposed. While ἀλήθεια emphasizes the Greek concept of truth, veritas highlights the Latin, and ‫ת‬ ‫מֶ‬ ‫אֱ‬ the Hebrew. The concepts are representatively demonstrated in the thoughts of Plato, Tertullian, Augustine, Descartes, Kant, and Kierkegaard. Accordingly, this article argues for the need to develop an epistemology that is not trichotomic with the concepts of truth dissociated in different spheres of knowledge, but rather, as an inseparable single trinitarian truth. It is argued that there is a need to recover the meaning of truth from the Hebrew ‫ת‬ ‫מֶ‬ ‫,אֱ‬ as an important concept that exposes truth as trinitarian, merging the concepts of ἀλήθεια and veritas under human existential reality. The study proposes that the epistemology of the Christian philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, is helpful for this understanding, especially concerning his concept of appropriation of truth. To exemplify the argument, Abraham's test of sacrificing Isaac is analyzed. The trinitarian orientation of truth as proposed in this article provides a theological posture, framing truth as incarnational where "the righteous will live by the truth" (Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, Hebrews 10:38). Finally, this article also presents some implications for contemporary theology and the church, proposing that trinitarian epistemology is a theological antidote to current relativism. It also encourages the church to approach truth with a more comprehensive attitude, recognizing that every truth is God's truth. Moreover, it invites the church to inoculate the anti-intellectualist mood present in some evangelical circles, approaching truth doxologically.

Modern philosophical spectators have often found fault with the ways in which miracles were received by the pre-modern peoples of Europe and the Mediterranean. Historians such as Gibbon and philosophers as various as Hume and Lessing criticized the pre-modern world, implicitly or explicitly, for the epistemic significance that it ascribed to miracles. In various ways, these and so many other modern thinkers have suggested that miracles cannot play the role that the pre-modern world gave to them. In this paper I reflect on this notable disparity in the reception of miracles in modern and pre-modern times. The possible terms of its explanation is suggested in the view of Elizabeth Anscombe, who argues that the evidentiary significance that pre-modern people gave to miracles necessarily involves certain theological presuppositions. Supernaturally aberrant phenomena--supposing, contra Hume, that such phenomena really occurs--only constitutes a "sign," Anscombe argues, when one already espouses some theistic framework in light of which such a phenomenal event can be interpreted to be a supernatural sign of attestation or authorization.
Anscombe's view is that of a Catholic philosopher in dialogue--and as I suggest, in some degree of tension--with the magisterial teaching of Vatican I, which describes miracles as "external signs" that independently (and non-circularly) attest the truth of the Gospel and authorize the Church.
The thesis of this paper is that, while there are certain presuppositions involved when miracles (or "supernatural phenomena") are regarded as signs, they are not such as to threaten the externality that Vat. I  ascribes to them. Thus, with an eye to giving an explanation for the disparate modern and premodern receptions of miracles, I draw on the work of the 19th-century German theologian, Matthias Joseph Scheeben, to identify the presuppositions that are sufficient and necessary in order to regard miracles as signs. The crucial presupposition, I propose, that explains the modern/premodern reception disparity is the reality of extrinsic authority. The significance of supernatural events, I suggest, is likely to be ambiguous in the modern, democratic West, because in this cultural circumstance the correlation of power and authority is no longer taken for granted as in other times and places, and the notion of extrinsic authority--an authority not derived from the "consent of the governed"--is generally and presumptively rejected.

The chapter offers a comparison of an Orthodox and a Roman Catholic approach to the foundations of sacramental theology. With each theologian the author analyses an underlying epistemology, a type of relational and symbolic understanding of God, and then asks how these influence preference either for the church or for the world as a starting point for sacramental theology. In her conclusion she suggests how both approaches could complement each other.

At the same time several studies about the theologian of Leuven, Adolphe Gesché, disclose nuclear points of his theology: his systematic, depth and intuition, new roads are opened in theological reflection driven by his intuitions. This article aims to show the relationships,  implicit and explicit , of the author with the Fundamental Theology. This, in epistemological questions  values, issues, and functions  and in the specific deployment of this epistemology showing, thus, inclusiveness  among Fundamental Theology and Dogmatic Theology  of his life s work. An authentic monstratio theológica

Moleski responds to reviews of Personal Catholicism by Joseph Kroger and John Apcyznski. He argues that theology is tacit or rooted in tacit knowledge and therefore cannot be fully articulated. He portrays the Roman Catholic tradition as an interpretative framework that differs from scientific frameworks by being bound to a particular revelation made in history which is then preserved by a Specific Authority.

This article contends that truth is trinitarian and that theology ought to treat epistemology existentially. To demonstrate this, a brief historical study is conducted on the development of the concept of truth and how different approaches revolve around the definitions of truth as ἀλήθεια, veritas, and אֱמֶת. Even though these words translate the same in English, historically each one discloses different angles of truth. By emphasizing one of the definitions in detriment of others, it is argued that truth has been fragmented in distinct concepts apparently opposed. While ἀλήθεια emphasizes the Greek concept of truth, veritas highlights the Latin, and אֱמֶת the Hebrew. The concepts are representatively demonstrated in the thoughts of Plato, Tertullian, Augustine, Descartes, Kant, and Kierkegaard. Accordingly, this article argues for the need to develop an epistemology that is not trichotomic with the concepts of truth dissociated in different spheres of knowledge, but rather, as an inseparable single trinitarian truth. It is argued that there is a need to recover the meaning of truth from the Hebrew אֱמֶת, as an important concept that exposes truth as trinitarian, merging the concepts of ἀλήθεια and veritas under human existential reality. The study proposes that the epistemology of the Christian philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, is helpful for this understanding, especially concerning his concept of appropriation of truth. To exemplify the argument, Abraham’s test of sacrificing Isaac is analyzed. The trinitarian orientation of truth as proposed in this article provides a theological posture, framing truth as incarnational where “the righteous will live by the truth” (Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, Hebrews 10:38). Finally, this article also presents some implications for contemporary theology and the church, proposing that trinitarian epistemology is a theological antidote to current relativism. It also encourages the church to approach truth with a more comprehensive attitude, recognizing that every truth is God’s truth. Moreover, it invites the church to inoculate the anti-intellectualist mood present in some evangelical circles, approaching truth doxologically.

T.F. Torrance held the hypostatic union to be the normative instance of divine–human relationship. The structure of the relation between the divine nature and the human nature as delineated in the hypostatic union is the archetype to which all other theological loci must correspond. This essay argues that Torrance applied this Christocentric approach to formulate his own theological realism in which God's self-revelation through the Son and by the Spirit both shapes and is cognized by the rational structure of human understanding, preserving the distinct integrity of human cognition and divine revelation in theological knowledge. This constitutes a conscious attempt on the part of Torrance to reverse the synthesis of rational structure and material content in Immanuel Kant's transcendental idealism. T his essay examines the connection between (i) T.F. Torrance's notion that the hypo-static union is normative over all other instances of the relationship between God and creation and (ii) his synthetic conception of theological knowledge as the union of divine revelation and human cognition. It is argued that, by establishing the hypostatic union as normative over the divine–human relation within the context of the structure of theological knowledge, Torrance has demonstrated a way to retain the absolute integrity of human cognition in theological knowing (and thereby not obviating the fact that it

T.F. Torrance’s 1952 exchange of letters with Brand Blanshard is an under-utilized resource in understanding Torrance’s view of the nature and purpose of reason in Christian theology. This essay argues that perspectives from earlier in Torrance’s thought (1938-1949) converge in these letters and traces how the position Torrance adopts on the nature and the purpose of reason against Blanshard develops in his mature thought. It is argued that there is a fundamental continuity in Torrance’s position on reason throughout his career. However, there is significant development in the epistemological and theological sophistication with which he holds these convictions. Reason for Torrance is subordinate to reality and its purpose is to facilitate the conforming of our mind to reality.

Most contemporary discussions about theological epistemology have centered upon discussions about foundationalism, coherentism, realism, anti-realism, and basic beliefs, among other topics. However, with a few exceptions, one topic that has received noticeably little attention is the role that love plays in our knowledge of God. This essay turns to the work of T.F. Torrance to show how love may play a crucial role in our theological epistemology.
Here I show that Torrance’s understanding of the Holy Spirit’s role in atonement provides us with the tools to form a theological epistemology grounded in the concept of love. I begin by providing a brief overview of Torrance’s epistemology which features two important principles: 1) all genuine knowledge involves a cognitive union of the mind with its object and 2) knowledge of an object is only in accordance with that object’s nature. Having examined Torrance’s epistemology, I then provide a brief outline of Torrance’s theory of atonement. I proceed to address the first principle and explore the Holy Spirit’s role in enabling believers to enter the union of love necessary to know God. Following this I turn to the second principle and argue that given God’s loving nature we must approach God in love and in a loving manner in order to know him. Furthermore, I show how the Holy Spirit enables us to approach God in love. I conclude by noting some of the important implications these principles have for the task of theology.

This article addresses Barth's dialectical notion of experience in the 1920s. I argue that the theoretical problem raised by recent studies on Barth's notion of experience after his break with liberalism (i.e. the apparent inconsistency between Barth's move towards an increasingly neo-Kantian understanding of experience and his emphasis on the existential and psychological dimensions of experience) can be solved by the hypothesis of a Nietzschean influence on Barth's epistemology in the 1920s. I defend not only the historical plausibility but also the conceptual fecundity of such a hypothesis, which casts a new light on Barth's relation to philosophy and the notion of experience, and lays the basis for a consistent Barthian theology of experience.

Adolphe Gesché indicated the «principle of responsibility» as one of those that should guide theological work. Be responsible for faith and reason, for God and man. In the present study we expose his understanding and the particular development of this task in his work Dieu pour penser, attending to the double theological-fundamental movement —ad intra and ad extra— with which he used to articulate his writings.

Without dismissing or diminishing the holiness of Scriptures, do we dare to face their complexity? We really have no choice. The mixed condition of the Scriptures is so sensitive, through the constant intertwining of the human and the divine, the combination of covenant and sin, the alternating of the human and the inhuman. Since God speaks to his people and to humanity as they are, great challenges are embedded in the written testimony of God's word. The divine challenge and the human response, sometimes confused, often rebellious, are closely woven into the corpus of the Bible. So how far should we open the book? How far should we read further? Who does it competently? At what cost and for what purpose? To face these questions in a responsible manner, it is necessary to clarify the nature and proper use of Scripture according to Christian tradition. Hence this brief theology of Scripture, oriented towards individual and ecclesial conversion.

Alex Villas Boas  RESUMO O presente artigo pretende fazer uma breve reflexão sobre o desenvolvimento histórico da epistemologia teológica no Brasil, com ênfase na teologia católica, de acordo com as mudanças ocorridas nas condições da produção de conhecimento científico desde a modernidade, sobretudo, com o surgimento das Ciências da Religião. Tal proposta pretende situar tal debate epistemológico apontando alguns fatos históricos de maior relevância, a fim de captar as principais tendências. Com isso, pretende-se apresentar como se desenvolveu o perfil interdisciplinar da Teologia no Brasil, dentro do debate da Área de Ciências da Religião e Teologia, como caso sui generis, de uma via cooperativa e de perspectiva compartilhada entre as duas áreas de conhecimento. Palavras-Chave: Epistemologia Teológica. Teologia e Ciência(s) da(s) Religião(s). Interdisciplinaridade. ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to do a brief reflection on the historical development of theological epistemology in Brazil, with emphasis on Catholic theology, according to the changes occurring in the conditions of the production of scientific knowledge since the Modernity, above all, with the emergence of the Sciences of Religion. This proposal intends to situate this epistemological debate pointing out some historical facts of greater relevance in order to capture as main trends. Thus, it intends to present how the interdisciplinary character of Theology in Brazil, inside the Area of Science of Religion and Theology was developed, as a sui generis case, a cooperative pathway and a shared perspective between the two areas of knowledge.

Among T.F. Torrance’s many other contributions to the theology of the Church in the twentieth century are (i) his version of natural theology and (ii) his analysis of the epistemological relevance of the Holy Spirit. Through his reconstruction of natural theology, Torrance delineated a theological epistemology where the rational structure of human thought about God is positively determined by the actual self-revelation of God. Through his analysis of the epistemological relevance of the Spirit, Torrance substantiated the Reformed and evangelical conviction that it is only by the grace of God that God reveals himself and enables humanity to be the knowers of God. Uniting both of these elements of Torrance’s theological contribution is the insistence that it is only by God that God is known and as such it is a miracle of the grace of God, but yet, God is truly known in our creaturely modes of thought and speech. Paul Molnar, distinguished Roman Catholic theologian and interpreter of Torrance’s thought, has argued recently that a proper estimation of the epistemological relevance of the Spirit will bring about the demise of natural theology. To substantiate this position, Molnar appeals to Torrance and Karl Barth. Molnar is incorrect in his understanding of Torrance’s version of natural theology, which – far from being repudiated by the epistemological relevance of the Spirit – is in fact wholly consistent with it, and part of the same fundamental theological commitments to the priority of God in his self-revelation and the God-given capacity for humans to truly know God in our creaturely modes of thought and speech.

How do human beings encounter and know the Trinity? Trinitarian theology typically presents itself with an overwhelmingly positive, conceptual approach to understanding God's triune economy, which places knowing God through mystery in the background. This is no doubt understandable given our salvific focus on the economic Trinity who reveals Godself to humankind historically in Scripture and through the Incarnation. However, adding the apophatic to the cataphatic understanding of the Trinity calls back to mind that which flows from and is the ultimate purpose of conceptual Revelation-the experienced and non-conceptual union with God's mysteries. God's self-revelation is a filtered, symbolic mediation due to our limited creaturely capacity and God's unveiled incomprehensibility. For example, God the Son becomes known by taking on flesh, the living symbol which makes God known: " He is the image of the invisible God " (Colossians 1:15). We can attain deifying knowledge of God when the Trinity gifts its comprehensible economic qualities and activities veiled for our examination and contemplation. Revelation expresses divine experiential mystery through positive symbols and negative symbols – what God is and what God is not. The cataphatic-apophatic Trinitarian theology of Pseudo-Dionysius, Vladimir Lossky, and Sarah Coakley focuses on the energies of the divine persons – the Son and the Spirit being the communicable “lights of the divinity” - revealing through symbols the “Rays of God,”  while at the same time they uphold the undifferentiated essence of God the Father as entirely transcendent, unknowable, and purely experiential.  Rendering the Trinity as a mystery to be experienced in negative language alongside positive language is a Trinitarian theology of dialogue with what is describable in God and experience towards what is indescribable in God.  The Trinity reveals itself enfolded in mystery in order that the cataphatic disclosure may elevate us to what is conceptually known in God’s triune Energies, so that in that mystery the apophatic disclosure may bring us towards oneness with what is unknowable in God’s triune Essence.