Reviewed Book: Oden, Thomas C. Systematic Theology, V 3: Life in the Spirit. New York: HarperCollins, 1992

Muller, Richard A.

English

Scholars Commons

Consensus
Volume 20
Issue 1 A Ministry Miscellany Article 19
5-1-1994
Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the Spirit
Richard A. Muller
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus
This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an
authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
Muller, Richard A. (1994) "Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the Spirit," Consensus: Vol. 20 : Iss. 1 , Article 19.
Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol20/iss1/19
Book Reviews 133
Life in the Spirit. Systematic Theology: Volume
Three
Thomas C. Oden
San Francisco: Harper k. Row, 1992
xii + 548 pp. $40.00 $30.00 U.S.
With Life in the Spirit Thomas Oden brings to completion his three-
volume Systematic Theology. As he indicates in his preface, he has con-
sciously held to his initial commitments “to make no new contribution to
theology”, “to resist the temptation to quote modern writers less schooled
in the whole counsel of God than the best ancient classic exegetes”, and
“to seek quite simply to express the one mind of the believing church that
has been ever attentive to that apostolic teaching to which consent has
been given by Christian believers everywhere, always, and by all” (vii). In
general, and in many particulars, Oden has been as good as his word. He
has eschewed innovation and has clung powerfully and, not infrequently,
eloquently to the mind of the church as expressed in the great tradition of
the fathers, medieval doctors. Reformers, and Protestant orthodox theolo-
gians. And, at this level, Oden’s Systematic Theology remains one of the
best synopses of traditional theology presently available.
The volume is divided into four parts and covers the latter part of
theological system in a traditional survey of the doctrines of the Holy Spirit,
salvation (i.e., the ordo salutis), the church, and human destiny. The credal
model of Oden’s work is perhaps more evident here than in the preceding
volumes in the sections on the Spirit, the marks of the church, the final
resurrection, and the communion of saints. Of interest to Protestants is the
clear choice made by Oden for a doctrine of justification by grace through
faith alone, with good works as the necessary fruit of faith but not as a
cause of salvation. Oden does not, however, draw a distinction between
the Reformation and the medieval tradition on this point and he appears
to assume that the writers of the patristic era can uniformly be enlisted
on the Protestant side, contrary to the collected wisdom of historians of
doctrine like Harnack, Seeberg, and Pelikan.
This somewhat harmonistic approach to a distinctively Pauline and
Protestant doctrine points to a methodological problem in Oden’s work.
While he is certainly correct that this great tradition speaks with a broad
consensus on the chief m.atters of the faith as echoed in the ecumenical
creeds and to a certain extent still in the confessions and catechisms of the
Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and major Protestant denominations, a
problem arises when Oden moves beyond the fundamental de fide articles
to the level of detail—and diversity—found in systematic theology, even
within individual denominations. There is, certainly, no solid methodolog-
ical ground for citing Thomas Aquinas and II Clement as congenial bedfel-
lows with Calvin and Chemnitz in the discussion of justification or for an
attempt to define the “inclusiveness of the final event” (i.e., the resurrection
134 Consensus
of both the just and the unjust) by offering, without historical or theological
analysis, a catena of references and quotations like the following: Gregory
of Nyssa, The Great Catechism, XVI; John 5:28, 29; Matthew 25:32; Rev-
elation 20:12; J.H. Heidegger, Medulla theologiae, XXVIII; and Aphrahat,
Demonstrations, Of Death. Or, similarly, in asking what precisely is raised
in the final resurrection, to cite Romans 6:19; 12:1; 1 Corinthians 6:19, 20;
9:27; Justin Martyr, On the Resurrection, VII; Ignatius, Smyrneans, 2-9;
the Formula of Concord', and Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles,
III. 79. In neither of these presentations is the context of the passage noted,
nor are exegetical difficulties, nor, indeed, are the substantial differences be-
tween the various theologies noted: the reader is given the impression that
simple transitions can be made between thinkers who are chronologically
and theologically diverse.
It must also be asked whether the best and most fruitful way of hold-
ing to the tradition is “to make no new contribution to theology” and to
cite primarily the ancient writers rather than modern ones
—
primarily on
the ground that “modernity” is “corrupt” (vii). When Athanasius cited
Arius and Augustine cited Pelagius, Celestius, and Julian, they were citing
contemporary theological opinion. Indeed, it is the fundamental charac-
teristic of the great tradition that, in its defence of received truth, it is
unabashedly contemporary in its language and in its citation of authors.
And on a positive, as distinct from polemical, note, it is the fundamental
characteristic of the most significant theological works in the great tradi-
tion, like Athanasius’ Incarnation of the Word, Augustine’s On the Trinity,
Aquinas’ Summa theologiae, and Luther’s Freedom of a Christian, that they
said something new at the same time that they affirmed the great old truths
of the faith. It is precisely the element of newness in the midst of respect
for the tradition that draws the tradition forward as a living witness. What
is all too frequently lacking in Oden’s system are Oden’s own thoughts on
the issues, problems, divergences, and debates (yes, there are problems,
divergences, and debates) in the tradition. The tradition remains, after
Scripture, the great source of Christian teaching, but unless it is analyzed
in the language of the present and in dialogue with the problems of the
present, its insights may remain locked in the past.
Richard A. Muller
Calvin Theological Seminary
Grand Rapids, Michigan


Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the Spirit

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 20Issue 1 A Ministry Miscellany Article 195-1-1994Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the SpiritRichard A. MullerFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationMuller, Richard A. (1994) "Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the Spirit," Consensus: Vol. 20 : Iss. 1 , Article 19.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol20/iss1/19Book Reviews 133Life in the Spirit. Systematic Theology: VolumeThreeThomas C. OdenSan Francisco: Harper k. Row, 1992xii + 548 pp. $40.00 $30.00 U.S.With Life in the Spirit Thomas Oden brings to completion his three-volume Systematic Theology. As he indicates in his preface, he has con-sciously held to his initial commitments “to make no new contribution totheology”, “to resist the temptation to quote modern writers less schooledin the whole counsel of God than the best ancient classic exegetes”, and“to seek quite simply to express the one mind of the believing church thathas been ever attentive to that apostolic teaching to which consent hasbeen given by Christian believers everywhere, always, and by all” (vii). Ingeneral, and in many particulars, Oden has been as good as his word. Hehas eschewed innovation and has clung powerfully and, not infrequently,eloquently to the mind of the church as expressed in the great tradition ofthe fathers, medieval doctors. Reformers, and Protestant orthodox theolo-gians. And, at this level, Oden’s Systematic Theology remains one of thebest synopses of traditional theology presently available.The volume is divided into four parts and covers the latter part oftheological system in a traditional survey of the doctrines of the Holy Spirit,salvation (i.e., the ordo salutis), the church, and human destiny. The credalmodel of Oden’s work is perhaps more evident here than in the precedingvolumes in the sections on the Spirit, the marks of the church, the finalresurrection, and the communion of saints. Of interest to Protestants is theclear choice made by Oden for a doctrine of justification by grace throughfaith alone, with good works as the necessary fruit of faith but not as acause of salvation. Oden does not, however, draw a distinction betweenthe Reformation and the medieval tradition on this point and he appearsto assume that the writers of the patristic era can uniformly be enlistedon the Protestant side, contrary to the collected wisdom of historians ofdoctrine like Harnack, Seeberg, and Pelikan.This somewhat harmonistic approach to a distinctively Pauline andProtestant doctrine points to a methodological problem in Oden’s work.While he is certainly correct that this great tradition speaks with a broadconsensus on the chief m.atters of the faith as echoed in the ecumenicalcreeds and to a certain extent still in the confessions and catechisms of theRoman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and major Protestant denominations, aproblem arises when Oden moves beyond the fundamental de fide articlesto the level of detail—and diversity—found in systematic theology, evenwithin individual denominations. There is, certainly, no solid methodolog-ical ground for citing Thomas Aquinas and II Clement as congenial bedfel-lows with Calvin and Chemnitz in the discussion of justification or for anattempt to define the “inclusiveness of the final event” (i.e., the resurrection134 Consensusof both the just and the unjust) by offering, without historical or theologicalanalysis, a catena of references and quotations like the following: Gregoryof Nyssa, The Great Catechism, XVI; John 5:28, 29; Matthew 25:32; Rev-elation 20:12; J.H. Heidegger, Medulla theologiae, XXVIII; and Aphrahat,Demonstrations, Of Death. Or, similarly, in asking what precisely is raisedin the final resurrection, to cite Romans 6:19; 12:1; 1 Corinthians 6:19, 20;9:27; Justin Martyr, On the Resurrection, VII; Ignatius, Smyrneans, 2-9;the Formula of Concord', and Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles,III. 79. In neither of these presentations is the context of the passage noted,nor are exegetical difficulties, nor, indeed, are the substantial differences be-tween the various theologies noted: the reader is given the impression thatsimple transitions can be made between thinkers who are chronologicallyand theologically diverse.It must also be asked whether the best and most fruitful way of hold-ing to the tradition is “to make no new contribution to theology” and tocite primarily the ancient writers rather than modern ones—primarily onthe ground that “modernity” is “corrupt” (vii). When Athanasius citedArius and Augustine cited Pelagius, Celestius, and Julian, they were citingcontemporary theological opinion. Indeed, it is the fundamental charac-teristic of the great tradition that, in its defence of received truth, it isunabashedly contemporary in its language and in its citation of authors.And on a positive, as distinct from polemical, note, it is the fundamentalcharacteristic of the most significant theological works in the great tradi-tion, like Athanasius’ Incarnation of the Word, Augustine’s On the Trinity,Aquinas’ Summa theologiae, and Luther’s Freedom of a Christian, that theysaid something new at the same time that they affirmed the great old truthsof the faith. It is precisely the element of newness in the midst of respectfor the tradition that draws the tradition forward as a living witness. Whatis all too frequently lacking in Oden’s system are Oden’s own thoughts onthe issues, problems, divergences, and debates (yes, there are problems,divergences, and debates) in the tradition. The tradition remains, afterScripture, the great source of Christian teaching, but unless it is analyzedin the language of the present and in dialogue with the problems of thepresent, its insights may remain locked in the past.Richard A. MullerCalvin Theological SeminaryGrand Rapids, Michigan

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1775&amp;context=consensus

Systematic Theology, volume 3: Life in the Spirit

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons

Wilfrid Laurier University