In recent years, John Webster’s answer to the question, “What makes theology theological?”, has become increasingly commonplace among Protestant evangelicals as the standard definition for the discipline of theology. His response asserts that “theological theology” has a twofold object: the study of God the Trinity in himself and all else in relation to God. Webster’s program has played a significant role in the reinvigoration of systematic theology within the evangelical academy and church. Nonetheless, space exists for critical engagement with his proposal concerning what constitutes a proper theological method for those who desire to lay claim to their Reformational heritage, not only catholicity with the Great Tradition.
The German Lutheran systematic theologian, Oswald Bayer, also speaks to “what is theological about theology” in several of his works, yet he takes a distinctly different approach than Webster. Much of Bayer’s theological proposal aims to embody a uniquely “Reformational” quality, particularly as it is captured in Martin Luther’s own theology. One aspect of the scholastic definition of theology as retrieved by Webster that Bayer rejects is that all theological topics are to be treated sub ratione Dei (i.e., “in relation to God”). Bayer sees a sub ratione Dei approach as a departure from a truly evangelical theology because it returns to a Medieval understanding of theology’s nature as a “science” rather than “wisdom” in line with the magisterial Reformers. A “universal” concept of God is treated as the unifying object of theology in place of the revealed God in the gospel. Bayer never interacts directly with Webster. Instead, for Bayer, the portrait example of a contemporary theologian who represents the view that theology as a science is to be conducted sub ratione Dei is the twentieth century Modern systematic theologian, Wolfhart Pannenberg.
The purpose of this study is to explore Bayer’s critique of a sub ratione Dei approach to the task of systematic theology in order to provide critical engagement with Webster’s attempt at a reinvigorated Protestant vision of Christian theology. To accomplish this goal, I will retrace Webster and Bayer’s arguments for and against the view that all theology should be considered sub ratione Dei, that is, “in relation to God.” Next, I will examine Pannenberg’s proposal for the science of theology as sub ratione Dei in order to understand why Bayer finds Pannenberg’s method evangelically deficient and deems it a departure back to Aquinas in place of the insights of the Reformers. Similarly, Webster’s formulation rests upon Protestant sources like Post-Reformation dogmaticians (e.g., Junius, Owen), yet his scholastic definition is traceable back to the thirteenth century Medieval Dominican “Angelic Doctor,” Thomas Aquinas. Finally, I will place Bayer in dialogue with Webster to see if Bayer’s critique of Pannenberg’s sub ratione Dei proposal has any relevance to Webster’s own method. The overarching goal for this “dialogue” is to arrive at a uniquely evangelical grasp of theology’s definition and task that remains substantially informed by both its classical and Reformational heritage.
Central research sources for this study will include engagement with Webster’s essays in God without Measure, vol. 1; Bayer’s works, Martin Luther’s Theology and Theology the Lutheran Way; and Pannenberg’s three-volume Systematic Theology and Theology and the Philosophy of Science.
**(This paper will be the second installment of a larger research project that I began last year with my ETS 2023 paper on Webster and Bayer in dialogue. I have received an internal university research grant for this project.)