"Fundamentally a Critical Principle"

Following excerpt from the Preface of Christian Dogmatics (eds. Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson, Fortress Press, xix).

As will become clear at several points in the body of this work, the Reformation doctrine of justification is fundamentally a critical principle. It is the demand continuously to submit all preaching, liturgy, pastoral care, church administration, and so forth to this question: Does this particular act of ministry lead people to find their life's justification, their reason to be, in the fact that the crucified Jesus lives, or are people left on their own, to depend on themselves for the ultimate meaning of life? If a churchly word or practice in any way suggests the latter, it must, according to the doctrine of justification by faith, be reformed. We tried to make this critical principle effect throughout this work for the ongoing reform of the church.

Indeed. The Reformation/Protestant doctrine of justification is "fundamentally a critical principle" -- the doctrine of justification by faith should be a Protestant pastor's philosophy (theology) of Christian ministry.

An Introduction to Systematic Theology - Van Til - Chap. 3

Notes on Preface and Chap. 1.
Notes on Chap. 2.

Chapter 3 - Christian Epistemology

What is the function of reason in Christian theology? Non-Christians fail to account for the effects of the fall upon human reason. These are the noetic effects of sin; the effects of sin upon our thinking and our minds. Human thinking, human reasoning do not exist as an “entity apart from God.” Non-Christians error because they think human reasoning is a valid starting point.

What is the object of our knowledge? “If we hold with Paul (Rom. 11:36) that 'of him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever,' we see clearly that the existence and meaning of every fact in this universe must in the last analysis be related to the self-conscious and eternally self-subsistent God of the Scriptures” (58). So, the only way our thinking and reasoning will make any sense is if we remember that, “to have coherence in our experience, there must be a correspondence of our experience to the eternally coherent experience of God. Human knowledge ultimately rests upon the internal coherence within the Godhead; our knowledge rests upon the ontological Trinity as its presupposition” (59).

What is the subject of our knowledge? Nothing is mysterious for God, for “God as the absolute Light is back of the facts of the universe. We hold that the atom [insert any mysterious thing about reality] is mysterious for us, but not for God. . . . non-Christian thought argues that, because man cannot comprehend something in its knowledge, to that extend his knowledge is not true. Christians say that we as creatures do not need to and should not expect to comprehend anything fully. God comprehends fully, and that is enough for us. God's full comprehension gives validity to our partial comprehension.” Van Til continues by relating this to Christian worship: “When a Christian sees the atom surrounded by mystery, he worship God; when the non-Christian scientist sees the atom surrounded by mystery, he worship the void” (61).

Creator. Creature. Acknowledge you are the latter, or kick against the goads and attempt to be the former: “All men are either in covenant with Satan or in covenant with God” (68). Those who are in covenant with God have their “Adamic consciousness restored and supplemented, but restored and supplemented in principle or standing only” (69). Those who are in covenant with God “confess their ethical depravity” and can “discern spiritual good” because God has regenerated them.

 
So, what is the place of reason in theology? (And we ask this question understanding that there is a difference between the thinking and mind of a Christian and non-Christian, a difference between those in covenant with God and those in covenant with Satan, a difference between those regenerated with the Adamic consciousness restored and supplemented and those with their fallen, depraved, and non-regenerate consciousness that is not restored and is without supplement.) God is changing our minds so that “every thought is brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” and “we use our minds, our intellect, our reason, our consciousness in order to receive and reinterpret the revelation God has given of himself in Scripture. That is the proper place of reason in theology. There is no conflict between this reason and faith since faith is the impelling power that urges reason to interpret aright” (69).

Renewing Dogmatic Theology

I enjoyed the article "Renewing Dogmatic Theology" by Bruce D. Marshall (First Things, May 2012). Marshall is interacting with Catholic theologian Matthias Joseph Scheeben, and looking for virtues for contemporary dogmatic enterprise. Lots of good things therein, my summary: With "supernatural focus, sympathetic learning, and humility," the dogmatic theologian disciplines himself to be drawn into the "mysteries of God revealed only in Christ." Once revealed, he meditates upon these mysteries (Dogmatic theology has its own "domain"--not being Natural). A dogmatic theologian is not a "virtuoso intellectual," rather, he is a humble man. Humble because of "love for and gratitude to God," who has exalted mankind beyond our wildest dreams. Therefore, "Dogmatic theology is most creative when it is most genuinely submissive."