Thomas F. Torrance's Reformed Theology*

ROBERT J. PALMA

Writing o n the theology of one's mento r, with whose wo rk o ne has been familiar for twenty- fi ve years, presents both an o pportunity and a challenge. The opportunity is th at o ut of gratitude this pupil may set before the reader a theology to which he owes a considerable debt. T he cha llenge involves doing some justice within a few pages to a rich theological output, and refraining from a commendation of the same which the reader may find to be cloying. In any case, both Thomas F. Torrance's theology and the reader will be best served through stri ving at a faithfu l expositi o n of hi s theology in terms of its positi on, method, distinguishing features, and contribution. As a way of introducin g Professor Torrance's theology, I would lik e to make evid ent where it is situated on the theological landscape, as well as cite majo r purposes and tasks he has sought to fu lfill in his theological service.

Torrance's Theological Position A Reformed Theology On the C hristian theological landscape, Torrance's theology is clearly situated within the Reformed tradition, very much bearing the imprint of the sixteenth century Reforma­ tion theology which gave birth to this traditio n. Variations within the latter do, of course, demand a more exact fi xing of his position, which will be forthcoming. Ecclesiastica lly speaking, Torrance is a Reformed theologian in that he is a minister in the Kirk of Scot­ land, which he has also served as Moderator of the General Assembly (1976-77). However, he would add that such does not insure that one is inpeed a Reformed theologian, for "there is scarcely a Church that claims to be ecc/esia re.formata that can truthfully claim to be semper re.formanda. " t Speaking hi storically and in terms of pedigree, and therefore more definitively, Tor­ rance's theology is to be called Reformed by virtue of its great indebtedness to John Cal­ vin,2 to a lesser but significant extent to the Scottish Reformers, John Knox, John Craig, and Robert Bruce, and to the Swiss Reformed theologian, Karl Barth, called by Torrance "the one theological giant of the modern era. "J But lest it be thought that he draws only upon Reformed theologians, it should be noted that he also makes considerable appeal to other major figures such as the Greek fathers, St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. Athanasius the Great, his "favourite theologian,"4 and also the great mediaeval theologians, St. Anselm, with whom "scientific theology in the modern sense began,''5 and John Duns Scotus. Speaking more substantively, and as a consequence of the above indebtedness, Tor­ rance's theology is distinctly Reformed in terms of the great weight he gives to classical Reformed doctrines. These doctrines include the primacy of God's grace and the Covenant of Grace,6 election,7 justification by C hrist atones and the supremacy of the Word of God.9 Although major components of the Reformed nature of Torrance's theology have already

*An outline of Dr. Palma's article appears on page 46. 2 bee n noted, to stop here would be to leave o ut wh at for Torrance is the sine qua non of a theology that is genuinely Reformed. It is in terms of theological method that Torrance is so emphatically Reformed . Meth­ odologicall y speaking, Torrance would have us above a ll attend to his striving to form and re-form theological formulations and conceptions out of o bed ience to the triune God, "the basic wammar of theology, " 111 and to the "ruthless questioning of the Word of God. " 11 He states th at the "Reformers gave primacy to the Word, to hearing, and to the obedient response of the mind to God speaking personall y through the Scriptures. "12 In keeping with the Reformers' posture, "a true Reformed Church is subject only to the Wo rd and is there­ fore the lo rd over its traditio n because the Word is lord over its tradition. "13 The Reformed theologizing at which Professor Torrance has worked for many years was expressed in the 1981 Payton Lectures, given at Fuller Theological Seminary, as a 'jluid dogmatics, "' 4 which he describes as follows: Rather it is the kind of theology that develops under the compelling claims of the Word and Truth of God's self-revelation and their demand for unceasing renewal and reform so that it may be a theology that serves the Word and Truth of God beyond itse lf with increasing fid elity and appropriateness. 15 What a Reformed method reall y and fina ll y calls for then is that Reformation "passion for the truth from the side of the object which inculcated a repentant readiness to rethink a ll preconceptions and presuppositions, to put all traditional id eas to the test face to face with the object, and therefore a readiness to submit to radical testing and clarification. "16 Tor­ rance states that "Reformed theology adopted as its systematic principle consistent obe­ dience to Jesus C hrist. "17 This is the primary sense in which Torrance would have his theology taken as a theology reformed. Theological Purposes If we are to get hold of the heart of Torrance's theology, it is essential that the funda­ mental purposes underlying his work be uncovered. These purposes have sprung forth, of course, from his own encounter with God's Truth incarnate in Jesus Christ. 18 As Torrance says of Jesus C hrist: As the incarnate presence of 'the living God in space and time, he presents himself to our fa ith as its li ving dynamic Object. This has the effect of calling for a living theology, a way of thinking which is at the same time a way of li ving, that cannot be abstracted from the life-giving acts of Christ in the depths of human being and must therefore affect man radically in his da il y life and activity.1'1 Under the impact of the li ving God incarnate, Torrance is moved to do C hristian theology which "essentially is and always ought to be, logike latreia, rational worship of God. "211 When asked by Life and Work, the Church of Scotland magazine, "what was the heart of his theology," Torrance responded as fo ll ows: " I would claim that it is deeply Nicene and doxological (theology and worship going inextricably together), with its immediate focus on Jesus Christ as Mediator, and its ultimate focus on the Holy Trinity.''2 1 Unlike theology which has sought academic or intellectual respectability through divorcing itself from the C hurch's worship and life, Torrance declares that theology "has its place within the whole complex of the C hurch's response in worship and obedience and mission''22 and "as a 3 scientific activity cannot be regarded merely as a science 111 itself, independent and self­ explanato ry. "2J Over against the causes and issues oriented recent theologies, such as libera­ tion, feminist, and ethnic theologies, Torrance states that "it is only when theology is pursued as a pure science for its own sake, or rather for the sake of God Himself, that it s intellectual beauty is properly unveiled. "24 Versus functional views of theological purpose, Torrance declares that theological statements "are at their very root statements of inquiry, praye r a nd praise to God made in the Name of J esus. "25 But were we to stop here in this account of Torrance's purposes, we would fail to do justice to those very purposes which ari se out of the rational worship of God and scholarly obedience to J esus,26 viz., forms of se rvice to the church and those she is called to se rve. In his theological work Torrance has sought to se rve the church's life and mission in her understanding of hi storical theology,27 in her growing understanding of God's Truth and the reformulation of Christian doctrine, 28 in the proclamation of the gospel,29 in her ecumenical activities,.i0 and in her ministry and witness to the scientific community.Ji He has not o nly written and edited books for other theologians and students of theology, but for ministers in "their preaching and teaching of the Gospel,"32 for "teachers of young people in Church and Schoot,"J.l for "the general membership in the Kirk,"J4 as well as for "people who are interested in natural science".15 along with a book "admittedly intended mo re for scientists than theologians. "36 With regard to a book of his sermons, he states that "if it can be of any humble service in imparting to the hungry something of the Bread of Life, it wi ll amply se rve the purpose of its publication. "37 Professor John Mcintyre, Torrance's col­ league for 23 years at the University of Edinburgh, in writing of his contributions on the occasion of hi s retirement, stated that "theology in order to the ministry has always bee n the sequence of his intention. "JX Torrance's purposes in doing theology, therefore, have both vertical and horizontal dime nsions, with the worship of God a nd obedience to C hrist being hinged.19 together with se rvice to the church a nd the humanity she is called to serve. He pursues theology for the sake of God, for its own sake as a science, and for the sake of God's created huma ns and world. Having sin gled out Torrance's purposes for engaging in theology, it is now time to take note of the types of theology he has practiced in fulfillment of these purposes. This is really to examine the more immediate theological tasks to which he has devoted himself and which fl esh o ut the larger purposes already cited. Types of Theology Torrance's primary theological effort falls within that sphere customa ril y known as systematic or constructive theology.4n However, Torrance refrain s from describing his work as srstematic theology, because of the tendency in such an emphasis to systematize "theo­ logical materi al in forms of thought not taken from the realities themselves"41 and to schemati7.e the Truth "according to some alien principle."42 Therefore, he prefers to refer to hi s work in the .a bove sphere as positi ve theology, which for him is a revealed theology to which the Reformers returned and which is "grounded upo n the Word of God and obedient conformity to it in the f'aith and teaching of the Church. "41 Positive theology involves actual knowledge of God a nd "the conformity of thought with it s object, but here the object is God revealing Himself in His Word, encountering us as Subject, and addressin g us as 4 subjects over against Hirn and in communion with Hirn."44 Here we have "the science of pure theology, in wh ich we let the nature and pattern of that into which we inquire impose themse lves upon our minds. "45 Within the sphere of such positive theology, Torrance's "main theological work o r interes t''46 has continued to be "in the fi eld of Christology and Soteriology. "47 He sets the above theology over against natural theology, also termed philo­ sophical theology, understood as "an independent conceptual system antecedent to actual knowledge of God"48 which "as such supplied the general frame of reference in which 're­ vealed theology' was interpreted.''49 However, as wi ll be noted, Torrance does have a place for a transformed "natural theology,''50 and a "philosophical theology''5 1 taken as the Philos­ ophy of T heology. 52 Torrance would also have his primary theological work viewed as dogmatic theology, "not authoritarian or 'dogrnatical', ''53 and more exactly Chrisitan Dogmatics, of which he was Professor at New College, University of Edinburch, from 1952 to 1979.54 Being a far cry from dogmatism, genuine dogmatic theology "seeks to unfold and present the content of the Word of God within the limits of the Church prescribed for it by the Incarnation and the apostolic foundation, and to articulate that content today through an examination of the doctrinal decisions in the past,''55 while also laying "bare the essential interrelation of all the doctrines of the faith, and their integration within the one body of C hrist, within the whole structure of obedience to C hrist.''5<• But Torrance has also pursued dogmatic theology as a critical task involving testing "the mind of the Church in accordance with the biblical revelation,''57 and examining historical dogmas "in their historical development and forma­ ti o n, testing their rightness and propriety"5S under subjecti o n to "the indivisible dogma, the Truth and Act of God in J esus C hrist the incarnate Word, who 'as such cannot be resolved into statements. "59 This is the context in which Torrance's work in hi storical theology, involving the exposition and critique of historical theological dogmas and formulations, must be viewed . His exploration of past theologies pl ays a supporting role in his practicing of positive or dogmatic theology, which is the type of theology to wh ich he is primarily devoted, and out of which proceeds critical assessment of historical dogmas and theologies. Torrance has also devoted great effort to what he has termed the "Philosophy of Theology,''"' which he also ca ll s "philosophical theology,'Y• 1 but which must be sharply dis­ tinguished from that natural theology cited above as well as from "the erroneous line taken so often by apologetics, whether by the theologian or the preacher. 'Y'2 He sees the relation of Philosophy of Theology to theological science as analogous to the relation of the Philoso­ phy of Science to the natural sc iences 6 ·1 The Philosophy of Theology to which he gave such sustai ned attentio n in hi s Theological Science is reall y "the meta-science of our direct cogni­ tive relation with God. "M The theologian "must develop, li ke the physicist, his own rneta­ science o r critical and epi stemological clarification of his basic concepts, if he is to give the faith compelling expressio n in the thought-world of today with its roots secured in the permanent theological gains of the past and the ground cleared for decisive advance in the future. 'Y•5 Torrance's intention in doing Philosophy of Theology was "to clarify the proc­ esses of scientific activity in theology, to throw human thinking of God back upon Hirn as its direct and proper Object, and thus to serve the se lf-scrutiny of theology as a pure science. 'Y>I• It is through such deli berate renection o n appropriate theo-logic and theological 5 meth od th at "pos iti ve th eo logy must develop it s ow n 'four-dimensional geo metry', as it were, whi ch one might ca ll th e meta-science of theology, but it must be one th at is ind issol­ ubl y fu sed wi th positi ve and actual kn owledge. 'Y•7 On th e meta-scientifi c level of theo logical science, in compari son to "th e 'economic' trinitarian relations at the theological leve l,'Y•Kwe have adva nced to "the hi gher, co ntrolling level of 'ontological' trinitarian relations"69 and "arc ex pli citl y co nce rned with th e epistemologica l and ont ological structure of our kn owl­ edge of God, "70 being "lifted up in th ought to th e leve l of 'the Ontological Trinity' or 'the Immanent Trinit y,' as it is va ri ously ca ll ed."71 It is on the bas is of such theological reOection and se lf-ex amin ati on th at E. L. Masca ll states: One of th e ve ry few British th eologians of rece nt years who have se ri ously enquired into the nature of the discipline to whi ch th ey are committed is th e Presbyteri an sc holar Dr. Thomas F. Torrance, who occupies the chair of Christian Dogmatics in the Uni ve rsity of Edinburghn Bou nd up with the above Philosoph y of Theo logy is Torrance's theo logical acti vity best desc ribed as theo logical dialogue wit h natural science and phys ics in particul ar. He hold s that this two-way stree t can provid e benefit s for both theological and natural science. The contribution of theo logy to natu ral science includes three fund amental id eas provided by Greek Christi an theo logians in Alexandria from the fourth to the sixth centruy,73 viz., "the rational unity of the universe,"74 "the contingent rationality or intelligihility of' the universe, "75 and " the ji'eedom of the universe, that is, its contingenl freedom. ''76 Torrance also cites a "masterful obj ecti vity, with its di stinction betwee n unwarranted presupposition and proper entailment arising out of the nature of the object,"77 which the Reformation co ntributed to "the modern world"78 and out of wh ich "came the sp irit and proced ure so characteri stic of modern science. "79 Moreover, as the natural sciences in vestigate and dis­ close the "hierarchical structu re of leve ls of ord er and coherence''XO within the created physi­ cal world , and push thei r inquiries to the bound ary of the same,8 1 they find that cos mological questions about "ultimate origins and ultimate end s"82 are raised, whi ch th ey are un abl e to answer. "The closer to that boundary science is thrust, th e more necessary it becomes for it to engage in seri ous dialogue with theology if it is to be at home in the wh ole domain of human knowledge.''XJ The above scenario has compell ed Torrance to serve theologica ll y the scientific com­ munity by givi ng answers to th e above questi ons through probing more deeply into the intell igible rea lity of the triune God,84 his free creation of the co ntinge nt and orderly uni­ verse,85 and th e incarnation of hi s Son which "as a whole provides, as it were, the intersect­ ing ve rtical dimension which gives the hori zontal coordinates of the universe the integrative factor providing them with co nsistent and ultimate meaning. "86 His ministry and witness to the scientific community also involve setting forth humans' priestly and redemptive func­ ti ons in God's creation. 87 Movin g now in the opposite directi on, Torrance declares hi s own indebtedness to such great scientists as James Clerk Maxwell, Albert Einstein, and Michael Polanyi. He has repeated ly emphasized that by maintaining dialogue with natural science, Christian theol­ ogy is forced to co me to terms with its own scientific status as determined by its own proper subject matter or object, its own scientific method , and its appropriate concepts.8R Also, theological science must enter into dialogue with the natura l scientific understanding of "the 6 created uni ve rse, for it is withi n that created uni ve rse and not in abstracti on fro m it that it see ks to und erstand and interpret God's revea ling and savi ng ope r a ti o n s.'~ 9 Theo logian and scienti st pursue their dive rse disciplines and tasks but within the same spati o-temp oral wo rkshop created by Gocl.'JO Moreove r, although the "materi al co ntent''11 of Christi an theology ca nn ot be "grounded up on the new science''ll of Max Pl anck and Albert Ein stein, .. . in pro porti on to the se ri ousness with which we ack nowledge the rea lit y of God's self-reve lati on within the rea lities of the created ord er of space and time, we will be open to all that is new in the di sc los ure of the Go el -give n rationality of th e continge nt uni verse 9 ·1 That Christi an th eology intersects significantly with natural science is "evide nt in the all­ im portanl empirical correlates of theologica l statement s about God's revea ling and saving operati ons within our spati o-temp oral ex istence, "14 to which it can be aclcl ecl that "theologi­ cal co nce pts without empirica l correlates in our wo rld of space and time wo uld be empty and irrelevant fo r us. "95 As to wheth er or not Torrance engages in practica l theology, it ca n be said that the pos iti ve or dogmatic theology he fo rmulates has bee n by its ve ry character relevant to the life of the church in its preaching, teachin g, and ecumenical ac ti vit y. Over against a purely fun cti onal view of theo logy, whi ch Torra nce rejects as he spea ks of theo logy bein g pursued "as a pure science fo r its own sake, or ra ther for the sake of God Himself,''16 and which he woul d see as being analogous to the tec hnological red ucti on of the sciences, he would argue that the above types of theology are onl y helpful because they have bee n pursued out of fid elity to God's Truth incarn ate in Jes us Christ. He states: T hus in all theol ogical ac ti vity, whether it be in the education of the Ministry or in the teaching of th e people, we are conce rn ed with two bas ic factors: with the nature of the T ruth of God as it is in .J es us Christ, and therefore with a mode of communicati on appropriate to his unique nature; and with the nature of the human receive r, and th erefore with a mode of reception appropriate to his human nature. 97 T herefo re, he can also go on to say that "all true theology is thus intense ly practica l. ''>8 And then he states further: That is why all theories purporting to show how the Gospel can be made releva nt to ma n, eve n modern man, in hi s need, are by their ve ry nature im­ possible, fo r they are substituting an intellectual relati on fo r the practi cal rela­ tion which God himself has established in .J es us Christ.'19

Touchstones of Torrance's Theological Method

A fund amental axiom running throughout the whole of Torrance's theological acti vity is that the way in which theology ought to be pursued must be fi xed by its pro per obj ect or subj ect matter. In appropriate meth ods and ways of approaching theological subject matter, which is God 's own being and acts as the supreme objects, can only lead to the distortion of these ultimate touchstones of our theological understanding and statements. Therefore, "we must develop a scientific th eology, operating on its own proper grounds and with its own distincti ve categories determined by the nature of God as known," 1 and "to know Goel , I must enter into the mode of rationali ty prescribed by the nature of God.''2 However, the cri tic may res pond that if possible knowledge of God can onl y be acquired thro ugh appro-

7 pri atc meth ods which th emselves have to be deri ved rrom kn owledge of God , th en it may be doubted wheth er Goel ca n eve r be rea ll y known. Torrance's res ponse wo uld be that proper th eo logical meth od ca n ind eed not be cleterminecl on the bas is or mere poss ibl e knowledge of Goel or shee r fo rm al logical catego ri es. But rather, "how Goel can be known mu st be determined from rirst to last by th e way in which He actu all y is kn ow n. "J There­ fo re, we are brought to th at crucial co nsid erati on of those fund ament al theo logical rea lities required as touchstones for th e definin g and refin ement of proper theological method. Theological Ultimates as Touchstones As indicated above, "only on th e ground of our actual knowledge or Goel may we develop an epi stemol ogy fo r it , for th e form cann ot be se parated fr om the content or the method from the subj ec t-matter or that knowlecl ge ."4 This ca lls then for further inquiry into the ultimate bas is of this actual knowledge, viz.., God who in his ultimate Truth "cond e­ scend s lo be one wit h us in our creaturely co nditi on in orde r to sustain our knowing of him fr om below and match it to himse lf. ' '5 Also, God's acts in the incarnation and res urrecti on of Jes us Christ are "u/1irna1es, carrying their own authorit y and callin g for the intellige nt co mmitment of belief, and providing th e irredu ci ble ground up on which continuing rational inquiry and theological formul ati on take pl ace. •v, Such ultimates ca ll for corres ponding ultimate beliefs7 "which press upon us for our recognition and acceptance from th e actual ground of God's interacti on with us''X and "which cannot be derived or justified from any oth er ground th an that which they themselves constitute. "9 For as Torrance states: "There is onl y one true God, who is not known by reference to other facts beyond or behind Him."10 Far from being humanly demonstrated steps constituting a logical bricl ge 11 nung by human knowers from the creation over to Goel, whereby the latter may be known, the touchstones are God's ultimate reality and acts of condescension which have graciously formed the brid ge whereby knowledge of God has been rea li zed. Torrance states: "That is the epistemological releva nce of justification by grace alone- no works of ours, carnal or mental, can establish a bridge between our understanding and the Truth of God. "12 He says further that kn owledge of God "is in accordance with grace, and therefore takes its rise from God's action in revealing himse lf and reco nciling us to himself in Jes us Christ. "13 In disc uss ing what for St. lrenae us was the bridge between the revealed knowledge of God and God's own reality, Torrance says that if the revelation of God in Jes us Christ is God himse lf, as th e Gospel claims, "then it must be anchored in the very Being and Reality of God through a bridge, and ind eed a oneness, in be ing betwee n the incarn ate Son and the Father. "14 Such a bridge makes real the knowledge required for shaping the way in wh ich theology ought to be done, i. e., out of strict fid elity to God's own Truth and being. Theology therefore must be viewed as an extension of our actual ordinary knowledge of God, for it "is only part of man's total res ponse to God. "15 When speaking of ex perienc­ ing and kn owing things in agree ment with their natures, Torrance states that "science, in every fi eld of our human ex perience, is only the rigorous extension of that basic way of thinking and behav ing. ''16 He goes on to say th at "all this applies as much in our relations with God as in our relations with nat ure or with one another. "17 Elsewhere Torrance writes that "theology reall y mea ns the completion in th e full realm of thought of the act of faith. It is still the Word of God though worked out in all the forms of human mental activity. "1 8 It 8 is in such everyday acts of faith in and knowledge of God that the ultimate touchstones of theo logical acti vity and meth od are already present. Levels of Truth, A uthority, and Knowledge It sho uld already be becomin g evid ent that Torrance is especiarl y conce rned that theo­ logical realities and their correspo nding bel iefs be carefully unfolded so that the inherent right theological order be ex posed. Otherwise, bein gs, acts, a nd fo rmulations which are subordinate to others may instead lord it over the latter and relativize them rather th an bein g themselves relativized. What happens is that our personal theological formulations assume an in ordinate a nd normati ve status, thereby fai ling to serve God's own Truth, where­ as "they a re truthfully related to the Truth only when they make clear that they are relativ­ ized by the T ruth. "19 According to Torrance, confusion of the vari ous levels of truth can only lead to dogmatism,20 autho rita ri anism,21 and even id olatry. 22 While all the levels of truth in being and knowing are interrelated , they must not be confused, nor identified except in the case of J esus Christ as the incarnation of God's ultimate Truth.2J God is, of course, the supreme Truth in his own personal trinitarian life,24 the immanent Trinity2s as it has been called , and in his personal trinita ri an acts, the eco­ nomic Trinity,2<> through which he establishes created truth. In speakin g of the "hierarchic structure of levels of truth, "27 Torrance states that "the ultimate Truth cannot be brought under obligation to, or under the control of, the truths of created being or the truths of statement. "2R However, in J es us C hrist "the Ultimate Truth of God has become incarnate in our world of contingent being,"29 a nd "he is at one and the same time Truth fro m God to man and truth from ma n to God, and as such he is the standard and norm for the formula­ ti on of a ll truth about God and his interactio n with man."Jo Here we have the "wholeness of the Truth embodied in Jesus C hrist that constituted the fundamental theological base or canon of truth in all lrenaeus' efforts to be faithful to the sacred Deposit of Faith in expounding and defending the Gospel. "3 1 At this point we come to the preaching (kerygma) a nd witness of C hrist's apostles32 through which he "was at work testifying to the mi ghty acts whereby He had redeemed the world and offering Himself to men as their Saviour a nd Lord. ".J J However, in the Deposit of Faith given to the church there was a level deeper than the apostoli c witness, viz., "the whole saving Event of the incarnate, crucified a nd ri se n Son of God. "J4 Torrance says further: "From the beginning these two levels were in separably co-ordinated in the Deposit of Faith, the second being governed and structured through the revelatory impact of the first upon it so that it was made to point away from itself to C hrist. "JS "The faithful recep­ tion and interpretati on of the Gospel as it took authoritative shape in the Apostolic Foun­ dation of the C hurch''l6 did req uire, of courses, that the apostles both live in the truth and do the truth.37 Although in the Holy Scriptures the apostolic mind was "enshrined"JB and the apostolic witness "embodied,"39 and they serve as "the source and norm of a ll our theological statements,"40 Torrance opposes "the regula r fundamenta list identification of biblical statements about the truth with the truth itself to which they refer. "41 Rather, "bibli­ cal statements a re to be treated, not as containing or embodying the Truth of God in themselves, but as pointing, under the leading of the Spirit of Truth, to Jesus Christ himself who is the Truth. "42 9 On anoth er level we have th e church's dogmas and creeds. /\!th ough "it belongs to the nature o f' dogmas ri ghtly used to be the medi a through whi ch we let the one dogma, the

Prima Vl'ritas, reveal itse lf to us, "4" and whil e th e Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed were effecti ve in judging the truth or fa lsit y of interpretati ons or th e Bible, Torrance still wa nt s to say: However, eve n here the distincti on must be drawn betwee n th e T ruth it se lf and the Church's fo rmul ati ons of' it , so that in any proper appeal to a rul e of fa ith in the credal se nse, appeal mu st still be made to th e Truth it self in its own substance and authority, the A uto11/ethl'ia , as the Gree k fath ers spoke of it. 44 In pointing out Karl Barth's emph as is on God's grace justifyin g our human theologizing, Torra nce says that "theological statements do not carry their truth in th emselves, but are true in so far as they direct us away from themselves to the one Truth of God ."45 Throughout our theo logizing we must "let ou r knowledge, our theology, our doctrinal fo rmulati ons, be called in to questi on by the ve ry Christ toward whom th ey point, f'or he alone is their proper

Truth. "41' The pattern of authority underl ying Torrance's theologizing need only be briefl y exam­ ined sin ce it ex pectedl y refl ects the above ord er of' truths. God is "the primary or ultimate Authority,"47 in fact , Torrance cites "the supreme self-subsistent Auth orit y or Freedom (ex­ ousia , autoexousia) of' the Lo rd God. "4K He also spea ks of "secondary authorities or dele­ gated authorities whose fun ction it is to se rve hi s supreme Authority, ... in such a way as not to obsc ure it but to let it appea r in all God's ultimate Prerogative and Majesty and to be ack nowledged as such. "49 With regard to Jes us Christ he speaks "of the divine auth ori ty of His self-revelati on in our world ly ex istence,"511 and th at "as the dec is ive embod iment of God's Truth he is also the auth oritative Judge of all that claims to be truth."51 Torrance states that "the place give n to the res ponse of the apostles in the ke1ygma is ce rtainly of authoritative and critical significance for the whole history of the Church,"52 and that "the Apostolic ker vgma of the Gospel, received 'by direct revelati on from J es us Christ' (Gal. I: 12) and handed on as the Depos it of Faith , was accord ed a unique and authoritative place in the continuing life and faith of the Church. "53 While Torra nce speaks of the gos pel taking "authoritative shape in the Apostolic Foundation of' the Church and thus in th e NT Scrip­ tures, "54 in the "two-way relation betwee n di vine reve lation and the Bible, ... authoritative primacy must be given to di vine revelatio n and not to the Bible. "55 With rega rd to the church's dogmati c statements Torrance says the fo ll owing: If therefore the dogmatic fo rmulations of' the Church have tend ed to have a magisteri al and judicial character, it is not properly because they have any doctrinal authority in themselves but because as dogmatic recognitions they are made to serve the authority of the Word of God .5<> Regarding the freedom of theologizing Torra nce says that it "is not less freedom because it is limited, for that which limits it, the transce nd ent Freedom or Authority of God, is the Ground of its freedom as creaturely or co ntingent. " 57 Arranged in their proper ord er, the above authoritative touchstones govern Torrance's theological work. Torrance's method is also shaped by the strata of knowledge of God. With respect to such levels Torrance cites John Duns Scotus' distincti on between theo/ogia in se and theo­ logia nostra,58 that is, betwee n "the supreme all-significant level of knowledge . .. wh ich God

10 has or himself' in the perfecti on or hi s ow n etern al 13 ein g,"' 9 and "such knowledge or Ciocl as is mediated to us within th e bounds and co nditions of our life in thi s wo rl d.'''" He points out th at this di stincti on is simil ar to that "in Gree k patristi c th eology betwee n kn ow ledge or God whi ch he gives us through hi s 'economic condescension' to us'''' and· th at "k nowledge of Goel as he is eternally in him self in hi s own internal relations. 'N The reaso ns for holding together both levels of kn owledge are the fo ll owing: If our th eo logy we re not interpenetrated at least in some meas ure by God 's knowledge of him se lf, it could not be real knowledge of Goel: but no r co uld it · be ge nuinely our theology if it we re not co nce rn ed with know ledge granted to us wi thin th e bounds of our finit e order of ex istence and thought. f•.1 The key iss ue here has to do wi th the co nn ecti on betwee n our professed knowledge of God and God's own be ing and knowledge of himse lf. Torra nce fin ds that fo r St. lrenaeus the bridge here is to be found in the mutual kn owledge that the Father and Son have of each oth er along with "th e Inca rn ati on of the ve ry Word , Mind and T ruth of God him se lf in Jes us Christ. 'Y'4 Torrance goes on to say "that the 'gap' betwee n God's knowi ng of him­ se lf as only God can know himself and man's knowing of God, betwee n what God has made known to man of him se lf in J es us Christ and what he is inherentl y in hi s ow n Be ing, has bee n done away in Jes us Christ.'Y•5 In any case, "it is onl y by di vine action that man 's thought may be related to God's T ruth and his speec h may actuall y refer to God 's Being. 'Y•f• Moreover, it is the Holy Spirit who speaks the Word of Goel in which he prese nts ."th e ve ry Being of God as the creati ve so urce and objecti ve ground of our knowledge of Him . 'W Also, jus tifi cati on by "the grace of God in Jes us Christ applies not only to our life and acti on, but to our kn ow ledge, and is esse nti all y relevant to epi stemology."r•KCo rres ponding with this justificati on, "verification by faith thus entail s an ultimate commitment to the obj ecti ve reality of Goel , before which our own thinking and knowing of him is relati ­ vised. •w Fin ally, the touchstones of Torrance's th eological meth od should be viewed in terms of the empirical-theo retical meth od required in doing scientifi c theology.

The Empirical-Theoretical Method of Scientific Theology In foc using on Torrance's empirical-th eo retical meth od , Wo lfh art Pa nnenbe rg's dis­ tincti on betwee n Christology "from above" and Christology "from below" comes to mind .711 Desc ribing them in th at ord er, Pannenberg says that "Christology is co nce rned, th erefo re, not only with unfolding the Christi an community's co nfession of Christ, but above all with grounding it in the acti vity and fate of .J es us in the past. "71 To a large extent, this is rea ll y no more than a distinction betwee n th e orde r of being and the orde r of knowi ng in Chris­ tology. Sin ce included in the Chri sto logy "from above" catego ry are St. Ignatius or Anti och, St. Athanasiu s, and Karl Barth, one may suppose that Torrance must also be long there. While Pannenberg's above catego ri zing probabl y in vo lves so me ove rsimplifica ti on with re­ spect to the several theologians he ci tes, such wo uld clea rly be the case if Torrance were to be wh oll y pl aced as suggested above. For he espouses an empirical-theo retical ap proach 72 which involves a simultaneous unfolding and groun ding of ultimate beliefs in God's ulti­ mate acts of incarnation and res urrection through penetrating "more dee ply into the self­ co mmunicati on of God in the saving and revealing activity of Christ and in his Spirit. "7.1 Howeve r, it mu st be made clea r at th e outset that these ulti mates "must be accepted, or

11 rejected as such, for they ca nn ot be ve rified or va lidated on any oth er ground s th an those which they th emselves prov id e. "74 Moreove r, as ev id ent in our di sc uss ion or the just ificati on or knowledge by grace, it mu st be stressed here that God is the one who has gro und ed all his acts in himself and our theo logical beliefs in hi s ow n being and acts. Torra nce's empirical-theo reti cal meth od is itse lf dictated by God's dynamic interac ti on with his spati o-temporal creati on and th e fac t th at "empirical and th eo retical factors are in se parably interwove n with one another"75 already on the level of our eve ryday enco unter with God . As in the dynamic fi eld theo ry7" of the new science / ph ysi cs, in vo lving "th e onto­ logical integrati on of structure and matter or fo rm and bein g, "77 scientific theology must employ a method which does justice to the whole fi eld of God 's ultimate acts7x wherein we are co nce rned "not just with God / man relati ons, but with God/ man/ world or God/ wo rld / man relati ons, so that an unde rstanding of the ll'orld enters into th e coe ffi cients of theologi­ cal concepts and statements."79 In this meth od an attempt is not made to ded uce on the bas is of God's own intelligi ble reality ultimate beliefs asse rting hi s ult imate acts withi n our empirical wo rld , nor to deduce ultimate beliefs about God and his acts on the bas is of obse rved or empirical phenomena,x0 eve n in the life of Jes us.xi Rather, this meth od is a "way of thinking in whi ch the empirical and theoreti cal fa ctors are held in inse parable unity."x2 As a theological meth od it has it s bas is in th e Nice ne Council's affirmati on that Christ is "of one and the same being with the Father, "IU in whi ch homoousion the und erstanding of th e Church is firml y set on a unitary basis which is both epistemological and ontological, fo r it entails a uni ty in bein g and a unity in intelligibility in God's se/fgiving and se/f revealing in Jes us Christ, and corres pondingly in our knowing of hi m insofar as it is all owed to fa ll under the co mpelling power or that se(fgiving and se/f revealing in Jes us Christ. 84 Thi s "i ndi visible oneness betwee n Christ the in ca rn ate Son and Goel the Father"85 brings together into a unitary fi eld th e major strata of truth, discussed ea rlier, and unifies the empirical or obse rva ble phenomena of God's ultimate acts in Jes us Christ with God's own intelligible reality as their final unifying ground . As already intimated, Torra nce grants a large place to the "empirical co rrelates"86 of God's ultim ate acts, fo r th ey "have an esse nti al pl ace in any theo logy th at see ks to be faithful both to the creati on and to the incarn ati on, "87 and with out them theological formu­ lati ons "would be entirely without meaning and applicability in our human and creaturely ex istence."88 However, he stresses at the same time that "we do not proceed in an empiricist and pos iti vist way by trying to ded uce wh o Jes us Christ was from 'obse rvati onal data',"1<'l nor can God's acts of inca rn ation and res urrection as such be ve ri fied "within the natural orde r of things in which th ey neve rtheless share. "'Ill Bu t Torrance also rejects the dualist and phenomenalist approaches in whi ch "the observa ble pattern of things in nature is torn away from a frame of obj ective structures in rea lity and loses its underl ying co herence, with the result that it suffers se ri ous di stortion and disintegration. ''11 This also applies to events in J es us' life "which do not see m to make se nse to use when we regard them merely on the level of obse rva ble phenomena, ... but when we co nsid er them in correlatio n with addition­ al fac tors introduced fr om a higher level, they are discerned to present a profoundly inte lli ­ gible pattern compelling the assent of our minds. "

12 tryin g to fit him into th e surface pattern s of other 'phenomena,' "JJ fo r as Torrance goes on to say: Onl y by penetrating int o th e non-o bse rvable intelli gibl e reality of Christ, only by penetrating into his esse ntial Lot:os, which is co nstitutive of hls inca rn ate rea lity, may we grasp Christ in hi s wholeness and inherent fo rce.'i4 T herefore, while empirical co rrelates are necessary coeffi cient s of God's ultimate acts, and belong to "the ev id enti al ground s of our dee penin g knowledge in th eo logical and herme­ neuti ca l activity, "JS they are not su ffi cient bases whereby the theologian "may deduce theo­ logical id eas . ''ll> On the other hand , just as the be liever or theo logian cann ot infer from below ultimate beliefs sim pl y on th e basis of obse rved phenomena, neither can he simply deduce or unfold fr om above ultimate beliefs affi rming God's ultimate acts based just on a priori assumptions and se lf-ev id ent principles:n For ri ghtl y "und erstood theological dogmatics is not a closed, logico-deductive system of knowledge, "18 fo r in -theo logy we should "seek to penetrate into its inner logic, not by arguing logico-deducti ve ly from fi xed premi ses but by laying bare the premises em bed ded in the intrinsic connections of the subj ect-matter. "19 As examples of this way of theologizing Torrance cites St. Athanasiu s' De incarnatione and St. Anselm's Cur Deus Homo. 11111 Because of the freedom of God and hi s grace and the co ntinge nt nature of hi s creati on and interaction with it , the truth of theo logical formulations asse rting God's ultimate acts cann ot be simply inferred from true statements co nce rning hi s being, as though they were co nstituents of a closed deductive system. Rather, because "the Logic of Grace is the way the Truth has taken in His discl os ure to us" 111 1 and "because He does not cease to be Grace in our knowing of Him, all our thoughts and their interrelations must renect this movement of Grace. "111 2 Moreover, "it is the logic of the Grace of the Lo rd Jesus Christ that is the manifestation of the Logic of God."111.l In continuity with this Torrance therefore says the following regarding Jesus Christ: But here we must learn the discipl ine of thinking co njunctively toget her his human-historical and divine-eternal aspects or levels, and must thus think of him from the start as at once human and divine- one indivisible, whole rea li ­ ty.1114 I would conclude by saying that Torrance's empirical-theoretical met hod is really a way of theological thinking carried out in fid elity to the logic and ges talt of God's grace.

Cardinal Facets of Torrance's Theology Without being able to do justice to all the significant facets composing the shape of Torrance's theology, those key facets must be brieny examined which now directly from the above way of doing theology, and above all from the majestic subj ect matter to which Christian theology is called to be obedient. Just as he holds that theological method must be determined by its subj ect matter, so must his th eo logy be shaped by both. Some effort will also be made to show how and why a specific face t fo llows from another and how th ey are interrelated. A Trinitarian Theology Like the theologies of St. Athanasius, J ohn Calvin , and Karl Barth, Torrance's theol­ ogy is shaped at the outset by the reality of the triune God. When asked about "the heart of

13 his theology,"1 he res po nded that it has "its ultimate foc us o n the Holy T rinity,"2 and thercrore hi s whole theology wo uld be trini tari an.J In a sermo n entitled "The Trinity of Love, "4 based o n 11 Corinthians 13: 14, whi ch he preached and rewrote many years ago, he said that the fact of the three persons in o ne God "is such a hi gh and wo nd erful mys tery th at even the greatest theologians can onl y speak ve ry stammeringly about it. "5 It is o ut or humble submission to such a great mystery that Torrance seeks to think theologicall y and order hi s theological fo rmulatio ns. In a 1959 wo rk in whi ch he brought together all of the Catechisms o f' the Reformed C hurch offi cia ll y embraced by the C hurch o r Scotl and since the Reform ati on, Torra nce stated that "we find that most of them, which expound the Faith o n the basis of the Apostl e's C reed , begin right away with the doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy S pirit.'Y• He then proceeds to arrange thei r doctrinal tendencies in a trinitar­ ian order. Mo reover, in Th eolog)I in Reconstruction Torrance o rders the theological essays contain ed therein in a trinitari an fas hi o n.7 However, more certainl y needs to be said if j ustice is to be do ne to the trinita ri an shape of Torrance's theology. For he thinks "of the doctrine of the T rinity as the ultimate ground of theological knowledge of God, the basic xrammar of theology.'"' Torrance is ve ry much opposed to the noti on that Christi an theology can rightly begin with a doctrine of the bein g of o ne God, and then subsequently tack o n a doctrine of the triune God .'J For " if God is triune in hi s natu re, then reall y to know God means that we must know hi m in accordance with hi s triune nature from the start. "10 Torrance find s that o ur knowledge of the triune God has a strati fied structure 11 beginning with everyday knowl­ edge of God and moving "through the 'economic' trinitari an relations at the theological level to the hi gher controlling level of 'o ntological' trinitarian relations,"12 viz., those "ulti­ mate re lati ons intrinsic to God 's own Being, which govern and control all true knowledge of hi m fro m beginning to end. "11 He stresses "that what God is toward us in the three-fold economic activity of his revelation and redempti on, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, he is antecedently and eterna ll y in his own Being in the Godhead. "14 T he real basis for making this connecti on is in "the hypostatic union, the ind issoluble un ion of God and man in the o ne Person of C hrist,"15 and in the fact that both the Incarnate Son and Holy Spirit are of the very same being and nature (homoousion) as God the Father. 16 Torrance singles o ut St. Athanasius' teachi ng on "the in herent unity of Be ing and Act"17 in God which "forces upon us an understand ing of God in which movement belongs to his eternal Being. "18 Torrance asserts that "the Triune God is not o nly a fullness of personal Being in himself, but is also person-constituting Being. "19 In fact, o ut of the teaching of "the mutual interpe netrati on of the three Persons- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit- in one God,"20 Chris­ tian theology introduced an onto-relational understanding of person "which is a pplicable to our interhuman relations in a created way, correlated to the uncreated way in which it applies to God. "2 1 On the basis of "the inner personal relati ons"22 and "the inter-personal Communion''23 of the holy T rinity we have the persona lizing of relatio ns amo ng humans and their relations with God through the Wo rd become incarnate24 and the work of the Holy S pi rit. 25 T herefore, rather than importing some notio n of"person" in to the triune God o n the basis of human logic o r a creature ly ground, "the noti on of 'person' used of God must be ontologically derived from God's own nature, and therefore from the T rinity. ''26

14 Iss uing rorth from the doctrine or the ho ly Trinity a re, as Torrance ri ghtly sees, signiri­ cant implicati o ns for ecumenical conve rgence on the part o r Evangelical, Roman Catho li c. a nd O rthodox Churches. He states: "Yet the more dee pl y we press into the materi al centre of the C hurc h's fa ith in Christ a nd in the Ho ly T rinity, the greater is the pressure disposing us to reach agree ment with one anothe r."27 With regard to the Eastern Church and the Western C hurch, he says what matters "is whether ecumenical theology is rully prepared to maintain the homoousion both or the Son and or the Spirit for they belong inseparably together."2x At Torrance's suggesti o n, the Intern ational Academy or Religio us Sciences sponsored several years ago a seminar o n the doctrine or the T rinity, a ttended by theologi­ a ns from several traditions. Regarding this seminar Torrance says that "we found ourselves steadily reaching a remarkable unity in the approaches or East and Wes t, of Evangelical a nd Catholic theo logy, in which the views or Rahner and Barth were brought together on a patristi c basis. "29 The seminar's sta rting poin t had been "Karl Rahner's essay on the T rinity in Mysterium Salutis (i967)."Jn In connection with the doctrine or the church being give n too prominent a pl ace within the ecumenical move ment , Torrance states: We a re learning again that the C hurch is part or the C reed, a nd that the doctrine of the C hurch can be formulated as an a rticle or saving faith o nly within the context of faith in the Father, Son, a nd Holy Spirit; but we are trying to deal with it before we have gone deeply enough together into the second member or the C reed , raith in J es us Christ..1 1 The above emphas is on the homoousion or the Son and "the second member or the C reed" brings us to the Christocentric character or Torrance's theology.

A Christocentric Theology Torrance has also said that his theology has " its immediate fo cus o n J esus C hrist as Mecliator"32 and that it is "Christocentric because J esus Christ is the place where we wor­ ship the Father. ".JJ T he central pl ace that J esus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, has in his theology should already be apparent through the rererences made a bove to his exalted position in the being a nd lire or the holy T rinity, as the unbreaka ble personal union of Goel and ma n, as the nexus anchoring our knowledge in the very being of God, and as the theological touchstone to whom obedience is due. Therefore, the Christocentric thrust or emphasis can be brought out sufficiently by simply adding key texts a nd comments to observati ons already made. S ince Jes us Christ is "God in his own Being a nd Act come among us, ".14 it fo ll ows "that in our relati ons with J es us C hrist we have to do directly with the ultimate Reality or God."35 J esus C hrist " is the T ruth or God in the form or Personal Being, Word or God identical with His Person. ''36 In keeping with such truths, "the incarnati o n of the Son or Word constitutes the epistemological center in all our knowledge or God,"Jl a nd "it is the whole lire of the incarnate Son, the historical, cruciriecl and risen Jes us C hrist that forms the core o r the axis of the body or C hristia n theology. ".18 In contrasting the Reformed doctrine or God with mediaeval theology, Torrance says or the former that "here then it is not some prio r o ntology, but Christology which is a ll-determining in our knowledge or God. "JCJ Tor­ rance likewise arfirms "the supremacy or C hristo logy in our knowledge or Goel . "40 To do justice to Torrance's Christocentric emphasis, attention must be give n in particu-

15 lar to the vicari ous huma nity of J esus C hrist, which permeates his whole theology. As T orrance himself puts it: But the cutting edge of "my theology" would be, I suppose, what I call "the vicari ous humanity of Christ"- the fact that J esus Christ even in His humanity ta kes o ur place in faith, prayer, worship, mediating all we a re a nd do in His name to ward the Father- but reall y believing, praying a nd worshipping Him in our place in such a way that He is our wo rship, and our faith is a sharing in His fa ith and our prayer a sharing in His prayer.41 T o rrance find s this emphasis in classical G reek theology where C hrist's "mind, will and soul as a huma n agent are given their undiminished place in hi s savin g wo rk on behalf of ma nkind."42 In J es us C hrist we have God's "Truth uttering Himself and M an hearing a nd receivin g that T ruth."4J In the W o rd of God in carnate "the Word of God spo ken to ma n becomes at the same time wo rd of ma n in a nswer to God."44 In discussing Bo nhoeffer's belief in justificati on by grace alo ne, T orrance affirms that the latter "throws us not upo n ourselves but upon the pure act of God in His unconditional love, so that the ethical and the religio us life a re li ved exclu sively fro m a centre in J esus C hrist. "45 J esus C hrist "consti­ tutes in His vicarious humanity the eloquent reality of our wo rship."46 In J es us C hrist as "God l?f' God , of one and the same Being with God, "47 that is, the homoousion, we have "the ontological and epistemological linchpin of C hristian theology. "48 A Unitary Theology The unita ry character of T o rrance's theology arises straight out of its trinitari an cha r­ acter,49 with its focus on the hom oousion of the Son a nd the Holy S pirit, and its C hristo­ ce ntric character, with its focus o n the personal (hypostatic) unio n of God a nd ma n in J esus Christ. Its unita ry nature also a rises from his empirical-theoretical method which is itself shaped by God 's ultimate acts. He sees these key theological realities as undercutting those Greek, deistic, Newtonian, Kantia n, a nd pheno menalist dua lisms which have had such a devastating effect on genuine progress in both natural a nd theological sciences. These dua l­ isms have proved to be so problematical by reason of such unbridgeable gulfs as posited betwee n the sensible and the intelligible, a distant deity and a mechanistic universe, absolute time and space, and the pheno menal world and the noumena l world. These and other dua lisms have led to what T o rra nce sees in modern culture as the cultural split50 and o ur split culture.51 He goes on to say that "modern theological studies a re certainl y struggling in the to ils of our split culture. "52 T he difficulties and disintegrati o n in such a split culture can be traced back to va ri o us dualist assumptions5J through which unified, interrelated, and integrated levels a nd reali­ ties54 a re treated as disjo inted a nd even taken as dichoto mies.55 These radical dualisms even led to the eclipse of key levels of reality56 with the closing off of one from a nother, which in turn caused the disintegration of "the pheno menal surface of experience, "57 including that of J es us C hrist.58 T o rrance says of dualist modern science that "the o bse rvabl e pattern of things in nature is torn away from a frame of objective structures in reality and loses it s underl yin g coherence, with the result that it suffers seri ous distortio n a nd disintegratio n. "59 In res po nse to such disjo inted pheno mena o r a ppearances "artificial devices are often broug ht in to give them some meaningful coherent integratio n,'Y' 1 as where "highl y a bstract patterns of unifo rmity were imposed extrinsically' Y• I on the pheno menal surface. 62 16 Over against a dualist outlook Torrance pursues a unitary outlook, which he finds has a powerful historical antecedent in "the classical theology of the earl y concili a r period of the Christi a n C hurch "63 where it was "exemplified by Athanasius, 'Y"' and to which Barth re­ turned in opposing traditio nal natural theology.65 T he Nicene Council 's fathers/ theologians rejected the dualist perspective on the basis of "the inherent intelligibility and consistency of the fa ith ,'X>I• even as "they affirmed thei r faith in the unity of God's self-revelation in Christ which depended upon a unity in being a nd act between Christ and God."67 Torrance has also focused extensively on the science of today which "has steadily abolished dualism from its epistemological fou nd ations, and set natural science upo n a radically new, uni!ary ba­ sis.'Y•8 He states that a unitary way of knowing has overtaken a dualist one "in modern times especiall y as the implications of the Maxwellian and Einsteinian approaches to the universe a nd its intrinsic intelligible relatio ns have been worked out, not only for physics but for basic ways of knowing in every sphere of human activity.69 In continuity with St. Athanasius and the Nicene theology, as well as in dialogue with the physics of Clerk Maxwell a nd Einstein, Torrance has sought to formulate his own theology o n "the ultimate unitary basis,"70 viz., the doctrine of the Trinity, on Jesus C hrist "as at once human and divine- one indivisible, whole reality,"71 and on the universe "as ultimately integrated from above through the creative bearing upon it of the Trinitarian relations in God himself. "72 Moreover, he states that the incarnation as a whole provides, as it were, the intersecting vertical dimen­ sion which gives the horizontal coordinates of the universe the integrative fac­ tor providing them with consistent and ultimate meaning, in a way which a merely deistic asymptotic relation between God and the universe could never do.n Torrance points o ut that "a unitary outlook upon the created universe and the doctrine of God as the one creative Source of a ll ord er in the unive rse are profoundly interconnected."74 S imilarly, he points out in St. Athanasius' theologizing "the immense epistemological signif­ icance of the homoousion and the structural centrality of the Father-Son-Spirit relation, both for the bas ic knowledge of God and for the organic pattern integrating a ll the doc­ trines of the C hristia n faith. "75 Torrance speaks of developing "the inner coherence a nd unitary structure of the knowledge of God in and through Jesus C hrist,"76 the one in whom "we discern how the truths [of the Gospel] are alread y related in the decisi ve movements of the Grace of God in .J es us C hrist. "77 He speaks of a nalogues as "perspicuous forms through which ... we are given, however scantily, a unitary vision of reality in some fi eld of expe­ rience. "78 Finally, prior to our own theologizing, the richly diverse writings of the New Testament themselves "have a deep underlying unity in J esus C hrist the incarnate and risen Lord, who is the dynamic cent er and the objective focus of their creative integration. "79 On the basis of Torrance's unita ry outlook we next consider "the realist modes of thought that arise in such an outlook, in which we have restored to us the unity of form and being. "80 A Realist Theology The reali st nature of Torrance's theology fo ll ows from its unitary character,81 which was not artificiall y contrived but emerged by reason of fid elity to profound unities in God's own being a nd acts. Unl ik e the traits of his theology already discussed, the meanin g of "reali st" is not as readily a rparent and therefore should be explained brieny. In the present 17 co ntex t "realist" should not be taken to signify a so ber or practical theology, nor should "rea list" be taken to signify a be lief in the ex istence of uni ve rsals, such as humanness and good ness, although Torra nce wou ld have a pl ace for both of these senses of "realist." Dis­ clos ing his real ist lineage, he says that Divine and Continge/1/ Order "is an essay in the tradition of Scottish rea list theological and epistemologica l thought wh ich goes back at least to J ohn Duns Scotus''82 and "is also deeply indebted to the later tradition of rea li st thought which through James Clerk Maxwe ll ''R J made such a signifi cant contribution in revo lution­ izing our understanding of both ph ys ics and the universe. Elsewhere he reveals further hi s rea list roots where he cites the "basicall y rea li st''84 position of John Major, who influenced bot h John Knox and John Calvin , the latter holding a realist position85 to which Torrance is es pec iall y ind ebted. However, what he means by "rea lism" mu st now be spelled out more exactly. Speaking more ge nerall y of the realist outlook, Torrance states that "as rational beings we operate instincti ve ly with a belief in the rea lity of the external world ind epend ent of our perce ptions. ''86 While distinguish ing between signs and the signified, ideas and their reali ties, he points out that normally we focus primarily on realities signified,87 and "interpret signs in the light of their objecti ve reference. ''88 "Thus the natural operati on of the human mind would appear to be rea list. •wi In the state of affairs in volving signs and things signifi ed "the contrast betwee n id ea lism and rea lism arises out of an osci ll ation in emphasis from one pole of the se mantic relation to the other. ''JO Torrance highlights that realism in phys ical science where scientific theories are made to remain under the authority and judgment of the uni­ verse to wh ich they refer. "This is the kind of rea lism in which objectivity and relati vity, properl y understood, belong inseparably together. '"!t Along with this it fo ll ows that "the movement from primitive thinking to scientific thinking is one in which we pass from knowing things quoad nos [as they are to us] to knowing them quoad se [as they are in themselves]. "!2 In a rea li st approach, the words or signs signifying realities "se rve as trans­ parent medi a through which those realities show themselves. '"JJ From the brief outline of the realist position give n above, Torrance's conce ption of doing rea li st theology has already co me into view. His theo logy is rea list, of course, in that he strongly affirms the reality of the triune God and his acts independent of human cogni­ ti on. But more than that. he has in mind that emphas is prese nt "in class ica l Christi an theology, such as we find in the teaching of Athanasius and Cy ril of Alexandri a,''J4 where "it was held that God is open to knowledge in him se lf on the ground of his own se lf­ ev id enci ng and self-manifesting rea lity. '"!5 He also has in mind Calvin's "direct i111ui1ive kno ll"/edge of" God in his Word, ''!6 and his rejection of "a doctrine of rep rese nt ative appre­ hension as we ll as a doctrine of represe ntative perception, "l7 so that "we think rea lities and things although we employ id eas and propositions in thought and speec h of them. "J8 While there is a pl ace for media in divine revelation. "through these God speaks to us perso nall y and confronts us with the majesty and dignit y of hi s own Truth.''l'1 A rea li st theology distinguishes "sharply ·betwee n dogmatic fo rmulat ions Of the truth and the truth itse lf. "llHl and. in the case of th e Bible, we re ly upon it "for it s guidance in directing our und erstanding to the Word of God which sounds through it. or the Truth of God whi ch shin es through it."101

18 Torrance also speaks of "the inescapable realism of evange lical theology,"102 in which, because of commitment to Jes us Christ and hi s pl ace in the creation of the uni ve rse, we are compelled "to give the empirical reality of the created order its full and proper place in theo logical interpretation of di vine revelation, es pecially in its incarnate form and reality in Jes us Christ."103 Simil arly, because of our belonging to the uni verse by creation, and God's interaction with us within it, "spatial and temporal, physical and historical coeffi cien ts are the sine qua non of any rea list theological understanding and formu lation. "104 Thus, in a ge nuine rea list theology our formulations must not only serve above all the reality of the supreme Truth, but mu st also be subordinated to God's created truth in which hi s Word was incarnate. 105 However, it must also be said that both "truths of statement and all truths of created being se rve the ultimate Truth, while the ultimate Truth cannot be brought under obligation to, or under the control of, the truths of created being or the truths of state­ ment. "106 The above realist character of Torrance's theology now brings us to its rational character, for the latter has its basis in the former.

A Rational Theology It is on ly because God's being and acts can be known in themse lves that there can be a truly "rational" theology. But as with the word "rea li st," the meaning of "rational" as used by Torrance needs to be explained some. Like Barth, Torrance is against thinking of reason as a res cogitans (thinking thing), "operating solely out of itself without attention to the given. "107 With reference to Locke and Kant, he says that viewi ng rea~on as a substance or res cogitans was "perhaps the most disastrous moment in modern philosophy. "1118 Over aga inst such a view, he states that reason "may onl y be described functionally. "109 While Torrance recognizes the need for form al logic,1111 and "logical formaliza ti on,"111 for "theol og­ ical science, like any other science, cannot do without ve rbal and logica l machinery,"' 12 such operati ons have severe limits113 and must be subordinated to that rationality which is "our ability to relate our thought and ou r action appropriately to objective intelligible rea li­ ties. " 11 4 Therefore, a ge nuinely rational theo logy in vo lves using this abil ity rightly by co n­ form in g th e human mind to "the objective Rationality of God"11 s and his "active and rational revelation in Jes us Christ. "116 Simil arl y, for other sciences to be rational there must also be an obedient conformity of the mind to "the rationality inherent in nature itse lf. "11 7 "In every true science it is the nature of what we know that presc ribes for us the mode of rationality in whi ch it is to be in vestigated and knowledge of it is to be ve rifi ed. "11 8 What Torrance rea ll y has in mind here, in speak in g of th e rati onality in nature, are "the relational structures embedded in nature. "11 9 Likewise, operating rationall y in th eology is seek in g "·to penetrate into its inner logic , not by arguing logico-deducti ve ly from fi xed premi ses but by layin g bare th e premises embedd ed in the intrinsic conn ecti ons of th e subj ect-matter. "1211 According to Torrance, therefore, in a rati onal theo logy the human modes of rationali ­ ty are appropriately related to the prior rationality of God him se lf, hi s crea tion, and th e hi story of his interacti on with it. 121 God , as he acts in history, req uires a mode of rationality wh ich "we ca ll.fc1 i1h , i.e. the adaptation of the reason give n to it in th e rrocess of ack nowl­ edgin g God's revelati on in history and of obedient res r onse to th e Word of Goel co mmuni­ ca ted in human fo rm . "122 Whil e he stresses th at "faith and rationality are intrinsicall y bound

19 together"123 and that there is "a formal simi larity in the fu nctioning of scientific belief and theological belief,"124 belief "applies in different ways in accordance with the specific nature of the reality concerned. "125 He then makes the fo llowing conclusion: It is to be accepted, therefore, that belief in God calls for a mode of response in accordance with his nature as the transcendent Ground of all created bein g and intelligibi li ty, but for that reason faith involves an in tensely rational and not a blind commitment to God, in the course of whi ch there ought to take place a steady sift ing out of true from false belief.1 26 He also states that "the Word of God is a rational event,"127 and that "the reception of that Word employs the fu ll use of the human reason."128 In discuss ing the fact that "true C hris­ tia n in struction requires on the part of the learner or receiver a response of se(fdenial and selfcriticism,"129 Torrance states that if we a re to know the Truth objectively, we cannot but adapt our rational activi ty to the mode of His encounter, a nd the mode of His self-revelation. To surrender ourselves in obedience to the Truth, to offer ourselves living sacri­ fices to Him, is the part of rational worship. 13° If theology is to be fully rational it must respect and be appropriately related to the rationality of God and his rational W ord above a ll , but it must also be related thus to the rationality of the creation itse lf in which he has encountered us and become incarnate. This means that a certain "natura l" theology must also be pursued and formulated. However, only in the light and context of the above features of Torrance's theology can we come to a correct understanding of hi s transformed natural theologyU1 A Natural Theology Torrance's understanding of natural theology is consistent with those features of hi s theology already cited. T herefore, not surprisingly he concurs with Karl Barth's "rejection of an independent natural theology-treated as a conceptual system on its own, antecedent to the rise a nd formulation of actual knowledge of God. "132 T his is to reject that traditional mediaeval natural theology, called by Roman Catholic theology a preamble of fait h (praeamhula .fidei), l.lJ which "as such supplied the ge neral frame of reference in which 're­ vealed theology' was interpreted. "134 In mediaeval natural theology it was thought that na­ ture was "impregnated with final causes so that not only could an eternal pattern be read off the face of nature (thus giving rise to natural theology), but a pa rt from that understand­ ing of the eternal pattern in God there could be no knowledge of nature. "135 Torrance points out that traditional natural theology has flourished es peciall y when epistemological and cosmological dualisms have been predomina nt ,l.l<> as with the mediaeval Schoolmen and "in the so-called Age of Reason, when, especially after Newton and Locke, natural theology was brought back from its depreciation in the Reformation a nd was put to service by English deism. "137 Moreover, in such natural theology they sought "a way of throwing a logical bridge between the world and God if only to give some kind of rational support for fait h. "1.1x However, even as he concurs with Barth's rejection of such natural theology, Tor­ rance also sees in his theology a transposition 1-19 and transformation140 of natural theology. In hi s last conversation with Barth,141 in the summer of 1968 , Torrance found that Barth fully agreed with him in the way that he sought to explain Barth's "attitude to natural theology by referring to Ei nstein's account of the relation of geometry to experience, or lo

20 phys ics. "142 Torrance's analogy was that "as natural geometry is the space-time structure embedded in a dynamic and realist physics, so natural theology is the space-time structure embedded in a dynamic and realist theology,"143 viz., Barth's own theology. T herefore, as Einstein integrated a four-dimensional geometry into "physics as the sub-science of its inner rati onal or epistemological structure,"144 so Barth transformed natural theology by bringing it "within the body of positive theology, where it is integrated with its material content and pursued in indissoluble unity with it. "1 45 Through a unitary and integrative way of thinking, Barth was able "to reject the Thomist split in the concept of God evident in the separation of a doctrine of the One God from a doctrine of the Triune God. "14 6 In returning "to the kind of unitary thinking we find in classical Christian theology,"1 47 which St. Athanasius exempli fied, theology is committed to one coherent framework of thought that arises with­ in the unitary interaction of God with our world in creation and incarnation, and in which we are unable to make any separation between a natural and a supernatural knowledge of God.148 A transformed natural theology functions as "the essential sub-structure within theological science, "149 and "constitutes the epistemological intrastructure of our knowledge of God."1 50 Torrance holds that if Barth's position is accepted, and he believes it should be, then beyond what he appeared to all ow there must be "a natural connection between theological science and natural science, "151 in which case a "proper natural theology should be natural both to theological science and to natural science. "152 Because of God's acts of creation and incarnation, and the consequent "overlapping of created and uncreated intelligibility"153 in a unitary realist theology that is properly and truly natural, such a theology has a special role to pl ay in the dialogue betwee n theological and natural science. However, as already brought out above, natural theology is no longer seen as logical argumentation supporting fa ith, thereby serving as a base for revealed theology. 154 Nor is this natural theology a rational or natural source which provides natural science with physical explanations of "the rational structures of space and time"l55 which are inherent in the physical universe. Nor does it serve as an interface through which it is supposed that natural science can, on the basis of the inherent rationality of the universe, provide theological science with distinctly theological knowledge and ideas, gained by revelation alone. To gain a clearer id ea of a transformed natural theology's "proper place in the dialogue between theological science and natural science,"1 56 we must see more exactly just how Torrance in tegrates it into re­ vealed theology as "the epistemological intrastructure of our knowledge of God. "1 57 The character of Torrance's transformed natural theology becomes apparent through attending to the manner in which he incorporates into theological understanding and for­ mulation the main point in St. Anselm's so-called ontological argument, and "the bearing of the unity of form and being"158 on it, as well as the main point in the cosmological argu­ ment, and "the bearing of the singulari ty of the unive rse"159 on it. As should be expected from points made above, the force of the former argument is not "an inferential argument which may be developed fr om created intelligibility to the uncreated intell igibility of God,''16° but rather an argument which forced itse lf on St. Anselm "from the Supreme

21 Bein g and the self-identifying In telligibility of God. "161 In other words, there is no allempt here to build a logical bridge suppo rting fa ith, but a viewing together, "under the dyna mic impact of God's own Being and Word , "162 of God's uncreated intelligibility and created intelligibility already interrelated by God himse lf. Simila rly, as Torrance takes the tradition­ al cosmological argument163 up into his positive theology, especially as the argument has foc used o n the physical universe as contingent effect, it is transformed from being a n a rgu­ ment for a necessary and sufficient cause in volving a "necessary or logical inference"164 from the a bove effect, into becoming a real explanati on of real relations (i .e., o nto-relati o ns)l 65 God has established with hi s creati on of the universe. 166 Such a transformed cosmological argument, and natural theology as such, "is not a rational structure that can be treated as complete and consistent in itself, but o nl y as consistent within the empirical conditions of our actual knowledge of God and of the creatio n. "167 What Torrance then is reall y "concerned with is some form of Christian nalllral theo/­ ogy,''11>8 for in addition to theology a nd natural science overlapping, along with shared space-time structures, there are the basic id eas of the singular rationality, contingent intellig­ ibility and freedom of the unive rse which C hristian theology contributed "through thinking out the interrelations of the incarnation and the creation. "169 He says that if one objects to such a natural theology as being exclusive, the reply may be that "for Christians the inca r­ nation occupies a place of unparalleled singularity,"1711 and that Christianity "cannot, with­ out ceasing to be what it is, give up the claim that J es us C hrist is the way, the truth, a nd the life, and that there is no way to the Father but by him. "171 He then refers to "the exclusive­ ness of natural law, which nevertheless has a universal ra nge of applicability,"172 a nd says that as a selected natural law excludes other possibilities, so "the road God himself has taken in revealing himself to us in J esus C hrist"173 excludes other possibilities. "Thus, in his concrete singularity J esus C hrist occupies for us the place of a 'natural law' in the C hristian faith. "174 Torrance defends the use of "the term natural /aw" 175 in view of "the inner connec­ tion between C hristian theology and the basis of o ur natural science"176 in which "exclusive claims for natural law"177 are entertained. While Torrance certainly does not hold that "the concrete singularity of the incarna­ tion"1 78 can be inferred from the si ngularity of the universe or the exclusiveness of the natural laws of natural science, he does affirm that a natural theology integrated with both natural science and Christi an theology "can only reinforce our understanding of the incar­ nation even in its unique and exclusive character. "1 79 In fact, it is not surprising that there is such a reinforcement in view of the integration of natural theology with Christian theology's subject matter, viz., "the self-communication of God to man in the incarnation of his Son, through whom the universe was made, within the created realities and conditions of that same universe. "180 Moreover, natural scientific advances have had to face the "i nescapable singul a rity of the invariant finite speed of light, "181 as well as the "singularity of the expand­ ing universe,"182 which is finite and contingent, resulting in natural laws with their own exclusiveness. But far from the "unparalleled singularity"l 8J of the incarnation being inferred from the latter, "the rational unity of the universe"1 84 is a "distinctively Judea-Christian concept. "185 Nevertheless, in interpreting God's self-revelation within the context of the new scientific revolution, "we find that our basic Christian convictions are clarified and fortified

22 and are give n an even deeper relevance to the exciting world that dail y opens out to our scientific inq uiries. "ISC• I wo uld now brieOy consider ways in which Torrance has especia ll y served Christi an theology.

Torrance's Special Service to Christian Theology

Drawin g fro m Torrance's theological position, the touchstones of hi s theological method, and cardinal facets of his theology, I sha ll conclude this exposition of his Re­ formed theology by si ngling out what I would clai m to be hi s most significant cont ributions to the ongoing tasks of C hristi an theology. However, in making the fo llowing judgments I am cogni za nt of the fact that Professor Torrance is still acti ve in theological labor with publicati ons still fo rthcoming, includ ing a hi story of hermeneutics and his own Christi an dogmatics. 1 Although not having the latter in print, I fortunately had the opportunity to hear many of hi s lectures in C hristi an dogmatics and have lecture notes on the same. While the purpose here is not to summari ze the several facets of Torrance 's theology already set fo rth, there is bound to be some repetition of points already made. Theological Discipline through Obedient Questio11i11g Earlier I cited E. L. Mascall 's statement that Torrance is "one of the very few British theologians of recent years who have seriously enquired into the nature of the discipline to which they are committed ,''2 to whi ch I would add that he is one of a very few theologians throughout the history of the Christian C hurch who have given such sustained and close attention to the nature of scientific Christian theology and its method as a discipline based on actual revealed knowledge of God. For Torrance, theology is a very disciplined mental activity which, while a rising from the C hristian theologian's ordinary knowledge of God, must strive to lay bare the inner logic and connections which inhere in God's own being and gracious acts. His considerable contribution to theology as disciplined inquiry should al­ ready have been apparent in the earlier discuss ion of his theological touchstones and his concern for the right ord ering of levels of truth and authority, whereby what should be relati vized is indeed relativized . The truly scientific theologian is not free to choose or de­ termine what his subject matter, methods, and questions will be. In his Theological Science, a lengthy volume devoted wholly to the nature of scientific theology and related issues, already in the preface Torrance states that "scientific theology is active engagement in that cognitive relati on to God in obedience to the demands of His reality and self-giving. "3 Far from such a discipline infringing on genuine theological freedom, "it is in the service of the ultimate T ruth of God that theologians have their proper freedom in theological inquiry and in the formulation of Christian doctrine. ''4 Torrance has made a great contribution to disciplined theological inquiry in his stress on and cl arification of genuine scientific theological questioning. Here again we see that theological discipline and freedom are bound up together. According to Torrance, the ques­ ti ons "What is theology?" and " How is God known?" are empty and unfruitful apart from actual and intuitive knowledge of God. Only on the bas is of the latter do they become genuine questi ons making fo r new understanding and deeper clarity of actual knowledge of God that has arisen fr om obedient res ponse to God 's Word.s While Torrance clearly has a

23 place for the "theoretic questioning (quaestio) of the scholastic thought directed to the solutio n of mental problems,''!> in scientific questio ning (interrogatio) "you interrogate some­ thing in o rder to let it disclose itself to you and so reveal to you what you do not and cannot know otherwise. " 7 Torrance notes that Calvin applied this concepti on of interroga­ tio n "to the Holy Scriptures and to theology. ''8 Torrance goes on to say that "we have to ask genuine questions of God in o rd er to let Him disclose Himself to us."9 But even as scientific questions are put, they are themselves questioned and revised along with the pre­ conceptio ns of the scientific inquirer. 10 Some questions may even have to be rejected . "But all this belongs to disciplined investi gation."" Here the scientist as questio ner "finds himself being questioned down to the very roots of his being. "12 This is especially the case as the theological scientist puts his questi ons: He can ask them responsibly only as he listens and lets himself be questioned by the Truth down to the very roots of his being until he is set free from himself, from his own preconceptions and self-deception, from self-willed and arbitrary thinking, from pride of reason and desire to control the questio ning of Godu Torrance has made a substantial contribution to theological inquiry by showing how through being d isciplined by o bedience to its proper subject matter it is also set free. While Karl Barth also spoke of this freedom,14 Torrance has incorporated it within an extended ac­ count of the disciplined questioning that is required if theology is to be genuinely scientific.

Theological Integrity through Real Integration In the face of so much fragmented and disjointed traditional and especially modern theological thinking, based in large part on dualist assumptions and contributing to splits in human culture generally, Torrance has offered us a refreshing example of theological in­ tegrity and wholeness.15 He would certainly not claim that this integrity has its ground i>i his own faith and spirituality even though, as J acques de Senarclens points out, "Professor Torrance, in common with many of us, feels this same need for a return to a theology truly grounded in fa ith and worship, over against a rationalizing which reduces it to a mere system of concepts.'% In keeping with the observation just cited , I would agree that Tor­ rance is against striving for an artificial theological integrity on the basis of an abstract rational schema or formal logical categories. With regard to theology's interest in being systematic and coherent, he states that "if theology is to be faithful to the nature of the Truth, it cannot schematise it according to some alien principle. "17 He find s that the latter is li ke ly to happen when form is detached fr om being and when the phenomenal surface of reality is torn away from the intelligi ble structures in which it is integrated and embedded. When those seeking knowledge do this, including theologians and biblical scholars, then in search of some coherence appeal is made to such as the human imagination, religious consciousness, and rationall y contrived categories. 1H This results in an artificial and subjec­ ti ve coherence, in the absence of real integration. Torrance does not seek theological integrity for its own sake, nor does he hold that it can be logically manufactured if not already present in reality. He claims, and rightly so, that his unitary and relational way of thinking theologically simply re0ects' 9 already existing indivisible whole realities and dynamic relatedness within each of these realities and a mong

24 them. T hese realities and their relatedness include the being and life of the holy Trinity, God's creation of and interaction with the unive rse, the incarnation of the eternal Son in the indivisible reality of J esus C hrist, the interrelatedness of creati on and incarnati on, and the universe itself which "mani fes ts everywhere throughout change and flu ctuatio n an integrity and trustworthiness which are to be associated with the invariant properties of light. ''20 In faithfulness to such real integration, Torrance fi nds himself compelled to think along unitary and relati onal lines, from which emerges the integrity of his theology. He speaks of the Church Fathers' focus on "God's Being- in-His-Act''2 1 and the Reformation fo cus on "God's Act-in-His-Being''22 and that "now once again Protestant theology has become concerned with the interconnection between the dynamic and ontological that characteri zed the great Reformers. ''23 But then he says that in order to succeed we must go beyond "the development of Reformatio n theology,''24 that is, "to a higher level of thought in which a unitary theology comprises the two historic approaches to the Being of God discerned in His Acts, and to the Acts of God as they are discerned iss uing from His Being.''25 It is to just such a higher unitary theology that Torrance has given unstinted effort, even as he has sought "a new and profounder linking up of the Reformation teaching with that of the Catholic Church of the Fathers.''26 However, this should not be seen as an uncritical recovery of Reformation theology. Claude Welch speaks of a returning to the Reformation in post-World War I European theology which he calls "neo-Reformati on theologies. ''27 He goes on to say that "this is a 'critical' return and must be clearl y distin­ guished fr om the perpetuation of Lutheran and Reformed orthodoxies. ''28 As Reformed examples of this critical return, Welch cites Karl Ba rth, Emil Brunner, Wilhelm Niese!, and T homas F. Torrance. I would add that Torrance's criticaf29 return follows primarily from his own fid elity to the above whole realities and their relatedness. It is really in opposition then to atomistic, mechanistic, and linear ways of thinking theol ogically that Torrance has strongly advocated and pursued wholistic, dynamic, and fi eld theoretical modes of theological inquiry. T herefore, as was shown in his empirical­ theoretical method , unitary theology, and transformed natural theology, he is not intent on constructing logical bridges, nor providing primarily causal expl anati ons, but rather bring­ ing into view through genuine expl anati on real configurations (gestalts) present in God's being and acts, J esus C hrist, and the universe. In breaking through to the above advance in theological inquiry and understanding, Torrance has fo und much inspi rati on and direction in the unitary and integrated way of thinking represented by the cl assical theology of the Nicene theologians, St. Athanasius in particul ar. He has also been aid ed in relati onal and integrated ways of thinking in terms of unified fi eld s (gestalts) by Michael Polanyi's concep­ tion of the sequence of coordinated levels of reality as coherent fields having their own operati onal principles.Jn Torrance has also been assisted considerably by Clerk Maxwell 's and Einstein 's dynamic field theories involving re lati onal and unitary ways of thinking, as opposed to mechani stic and positivist ways of thinking.J i Finally, I would conclude that it is only on the basis of the kind of theological integrity to which Torrance has devoted himself so painstakingly, that there can a ri se both a genuine overcoming of the damaging divisions in human society and culture as well as properly conceived ecumenical thinking and move­ ment in the Christi an C hurch. J2

25 Theological Advance through Scientific Understanding From o bservations already made, especially in the sections entitled Types o/ Theologv, The Empirical-Theoretical Method of Scientific Theology, and A Na tural Theology, major features of Torra nce's contri buti o n to the di alogue between theology and natu ral science have already come into view. W hile clearly opposing the o ld adversary model of the rela­ ti on,11 as expressed in the old reli gion a nd science cont roversy, in which bo th bad theology a nd bad natu ral science we re a mply represented, he also rejects the view that theology or natural science can provid e the other with materi al content peculiar to the other's subject matter a nd method .34 In rejecting these di ve rse positi o ns, Torrance recogni zes the major contributio ns that each has made to the other in the past and sees the prospect of a continu­ ing fr ui tful interacti on where both theology and the other sciences maintain their own pecul­ ia r integrity, as sha ped by their res pecti ve subject matters a nd methods, even as they retain a stance of openness to each other. Torrance finds such a stance and consequent exchange es peciall y promi sing in the light of the scientific revolutio n35 brought about by the new physics of C lerk Maxwell , Einstein, and others. Torrance would have us view the dialogue between theology and natural science in terms of complementarity, 36 forti fication, and clari­ fi cati on.17 T orrance's own service to the above dialogue, in terms of hi s theological witness to the scientific community, is itself dependent o n hi s majo r contribution to theological progress through using what the new phys ics has to offer the theologia n in his own primary work . Reali zing that all sciences are human endeavors pursued within the same space-time wo rks ho p, o ut of the integrity of his theology a nd through dialogue with special sciences,38 Torrance has contributed signiflcantly to scientific theology by cla rifying the similarities and differences between it a nd the other sciences.39 T his comparison has been undertakin prima­ rily "i n the interest of theological purity"4D and to "throw theology back, vis-a-vis the other sciences, upo n its own proper ground where alone it can be true to the law of its own being, and reall y be a science in its own right. "41 In the scientific revo lutio n inspired by the new phys ics, Torrance finds ultimate a nd regul ati ve beliefs concerning the unive rse42 which fo r­ mall y confi rm similar beliefs in theology, help to clarify how they functi o n, and even over­ lap materi a ll y, such as belief in a n o rd erly, intelligible, singul ar, a nd contingent universe. Of course, theology has it s own ultimate beli efs, e.g. God is love.43 Torrance has also shown how the new science has recovered the three key ideas beq ueathed to the West by classical Christi an theology,44 thereby freeing theology from such false ideas as "determinism and the closed universe, so that theology can now be pursued mo re freely o n its own proper ground and can engage in deep dialogue with the science that owes so much to Christian fo unda­ ti o ns. "'15 By foc using o n Po la nyi's personal facto r o r coeffi cient in scientific knowledge,46 T orrance has contributed to the confirming and clarifying of the proper place of human subjecti vity in theological knowledge. He has also shown how fi eld theory47 in the new phys ics can be of maj or assista nce in theologizing in a relati onal a nd integrated fashi on. Mo reover, we also noted earlier how the dyna mic fi eld theory of the new science contribut­ ed to Torrance's empirical-theoretical method, his unita ry theology, a nd his transfo rmed natural theology. In addition to the a bove contribution, which in volved largely the uncovering of sup- 26 r orti vc analogies in the area of scientific meth od and it s ass umptions. Torra nce has shown how new scientific theori es ca n se rve theo logy's elaborati on and co mmunicati on of it s ow n material co ntent . es pec iall y the empirica l co rrelates of God's ac ts or creati on. in ca rn ation. and res urrecti on. Alth ough th e Christi an doctrine of creation ca nnot be derived from th e new sc ienceY the latt er's recogniti on of a singul ar. finit e. and continge nt uni ve rse' not only fortifi es a key co mponent of th e Christian doc trine of creation, but this co ntinge nce "forces us to ask what the uni ve rse is co ntinge nt up on, and what the sufficient reason is for this very sr ec ific and unique eve nt , the coherent singul arit y of the ex panding universe. "50 Along the same lines, Torrance states: General relativit y, which defin es the uni ve rse as a co ntinuous wh ole, consider­ abl y reinforces the convicti on deriving from the Christi an doctrine of the crea­ ti on of all things by one God. that the universe is characteri zed throughout by a unit ary rational ord er.51 Although kn owledge of God as un created Li.ght ca nnot be deri ved from "the dee pening conce ption of light"52 in the new ph ys ics, th e latter "in spite of its vast difference is surely a created reOecti on of the un created and unlimited Light which God himself is."5.l However, in co mparing the constancy, in visibi lity, and inaudibility of created light with the Light of God ,54 Torrance hold s that such compariso ns are not to be used "to bring our understand­ ing of th e Creator within th e measure of our creaturely co nceptions, but rather to aid the ex rress ion and communicati on of what we apprehend apart from them." 55 In th e incarn ation of the eternal Word of God in Jes us Christ and in his res urrection we ha ve the bein g and acts of God interacting with the created universe and its spatio­ temporal realities. Because of the empirical correlates of the in ca rnation and the res urrec­ ti on, Torrance ho lds that Christology and soteriology must be pursued in interaction with a new and appropriate scientific understanding or our spatio-temporal uni ve rse. He states that one of his purposes in Space, Time and !ncamation is (iii) to offer a pos iti ve account of the relation of the inca rnation to space and time, by penetrating into the inner rational structure of theological knowledge and letting it come to articulation within the context of modern scientific thought. 56 This book deals extensive ly with how "a receptacle or a container notion of space,"57 which dominated Greek thought, has res ulted in difficulties and confusion in historical theological accounts of the creation , God 's relation to it, and the incarnation. Over against this notion and und er the impact of the Christian doctrines of creation and in carnation, "Nicene thought developed a relational conception of space, "5X and there emerged in St. Athanasius' thinking "a concept of space in terms of the ontological and dynamic relations betwee n God and the physical universe established in creation and incarnation. "5'1 Here space beco mes a "differential concept that is esse ntially open-ended, for it is defined in accordance with the interaction between God and man, eternal and contingent happening. "60 It could be said that here we also have scientific advance through deeper theological understanding, the advance being the relational idea of space and time "which was given its supreme ex pression in the space-time of relativity theory'X•1 formulated by Einstein. Torrance also says that "it is large ly to Christianity that we owe the important place give n to time in the development of Western thought."62 Employing a relational conception of space and time, he seeks "to

27 ret hink the esse nti al basis or Christi an theology in th e relation or the In carnati on to space­ tim e, "'.1 with space and time be ing viewed "as ord erly functi ons of co ntinge nt eve nts with­ in 'Y•4 the created world , and space-time viewed as "a con tinu ous, di ve rsi fi ed but unitary field of dynamic structures, in whi ch th e theologian as we ll as th e natural scientist is at work. 'Y• 5 As the above notions are used, we must develop "a relational and differential under­ standing of space and time in accordance with the nature and acts of God and in acco r­ dance with the nature and acts of man.'H• In seek ing "to ex press the co-ordination of di vine and hum an cen tres of reference in the space-time of the lncarn ati on,'Y•7 Torrance also intro­ duces th e ph ys icists ' use of "the analogy of topological language"68 in representing "the difficult elastic co nn ecti ons betwee n the dynami cal and geometrica l aspec ts of things or between quite different kinds of space. 'w Moreover, in seek ing to speak or the "Incarnation as a coordinate syste m of ve rtical and hori zo ntal dimensions"70 he finds help in Godel's famous th eo rem about the undec id ability of ce rtain propos iti ons within the rules of a for­ mal system . "71 In hi s Space, Time and Resurrection, Torrance has "tried to think out the epistemolog­ ical and cosmological imp li ca ti ons of the res urrecti on as it is prese nted in the New Testa­ ment witness and to bring these into discuss ion with the implicati ons or our modern scientifi c und erstanding of the cosmos, " 72 with th e main purpose being "to give a coherent account of the res urrecti on in the light of its own intrinsic sign ifi cance which has thrown it s integ rating light up on the whole of the New Testament."73 In this vo lume he also thinks through th e ascension and the adve nt (parousia)74 of Jes us Christ in the above fashion . While th e res urrecti on of Jes us Christ is "a new state of affairs entailing the redemptive transformation or the old order, "75 "a tra nsce nd entl y new factor,'% and "only knowable through a rad ical reco nstruction of our prior knowledge,"77 to the extent that both the in ca rn ati on and res urrection are God's acts within our spatio-temporal world they "are and must be open to the kinds of ques ti ons raised within the natural sciences as well as the human sciences. "7X In other words, in view or the empirical correlates of the res urrection ,79 such as the empty tomb, the empirical-theoretical method is in order here. But at the sa me time, as God's acts, the incarnation and res urrection are "fin all y explicable only from ground s in God, "80 and the res urrection as the transformation of our spati o-temporal uni­ verse is "q uite inexp licable in term s of anything we are able to conceive merely within the intelligible structures of the world, or in accordance with our scientific formulations of

them. ' '!< I In any case, Torrance find s that several aspects of the new scientific understanding help theo logy "make its own proper understanding of the res urrection intelligible within the rational structures which it shares with the other sciences. "82 He singles out the change in the "concept of reality'"" 3 where "structure and matter, or the theoretical and empirical components of knowledge, are in se parably one";X4 the "relational concept ol space and time";xs Einstein 's and Polanyi's stress on the "multi-leve lled structure of human knowl­ edge";X<• and the fact that "we have to do not only with levels of knowledge but with different levels of ex istence or reality. ''X7 We see then that eve n as a deeper theological und erstanding is sought by also usi ng the above scientific perspectives and in sights, the ultimate beliefs in Christian theology are ren­ dered more intelligible to others both within and outsid e the scientific community. Torrance 28 ~I states that, like the phys icist, the theologian must develo p the "critical and epistemological clarification o r hi s bas ic concepts, if he is to give the faith compell in g expressio n in the th o ught-world of today wi th it s roots secured in the permanent theological gains of the past and the ground cleared for decisive advance in the future. "l\H Mo reover, it is within the context of scientific culture "that C hristian belief and Christian theology have to arti culate

and ex press themselves . " X'I He also goes o n to say that "Christianity must contribute crea­ ti ve ly to the controlling id eas of this scientific culture if it is to take dee per root and grow with in it. ''111 But the latter wi ll only be poss ible if C hristian theology is read y to clarify radica ll y and criticall y "it s own conceptual tradition in the light of questi o ns arising from its interacti o n with scientific developments, as we ll as in deep-level testing of the preconcep­ tions and beliefs underl ying these cl evelopments.''11 Genuine theological advance therefore leads to and promotes theological relevance. Theological Relevance through Real Relations· A refreshing facet of Torrance's posture vis-a-vis the issue of formulating relevant theology is that he does not share in the widespread compulsion to produce such. In fact, it is in the very absence of an anxious preoccupation with theological relevance and in the pursuit of a proper positive or dogmatic theology, along with its own meta-science, that he gives expression to a dynamic and relevant witness to human culture shaped by scientific revolution. Torrance's freedom from an anxious concern for relevance is due on the one hand to hi s firm belief that human theories and thought cannot establish the relevance of the gospel to human neecJ .92 This reOects his view that where there are no helpful re lations in being in the first place, human logic and statement cannot effect such. We noted earlier where he denies that the human reason can throw up a logical bridge between the world and Goel. But Torrance has an even better reason for not being anxious about relevance, viz., "in Jesus C hrist the Truth of God has already been made relevant to man and his need, and therefore does not need to be made relevant by us. ''9J He speaks of the impossibility of "substituting an intellectual relation for the practical relation which God himself has estab­ lished in Jesus C hrist.''94 Torrance has contributed, more indirectly, to genuine theological relevance by rejecting and repeated ly speaking out against the accommodation of the C hristian faith and the gospel to passing cultural trends and presupposed abstract formal categories. He opposes attempts to achieve "relevance" through the adaptation of the C hristian faith to various kinds of reductionism, resulting only in a fa lse relevance. He also opposes disruptive ab­ stractions which undercut genuine relevance. Torrance speaks against those in the church who have allowed "themselves to be panicked by the avant-gardes into translating the C hristi an message into current social manifestations which are themselves part of the sick­ ness of humanity. ''95 He says that "militant 'theologies of liberation' have assimilated to M arxist ideology the prophetic passion of Jewish messianism and the revolutionary nature of the Christian message. ''96 He speaks against a "reductionist view of historic C hristianity''97 which "converts theological statements into anthropological statements and indeed into au­ tobiographical statements.''98 In speaking of difficulties a rising from "the receptable view of space and time''99 along with "the reduction of space and time to a priori mental pro­ cesses, "100 Torrance states: 29 Pure theology will not a ll ow us to resolve away spatial and tempo ral relations o r escape from the rational structures that the creati o n of space and time import, nor will it all ow us to elaborate notions of space and time in abstracto and then to use them as fi xed forms within which to interpret the work of God, fo rcing our understanding or Hi s grace into their rigid mould. 10 1 Torrance also cites other in stances of reducti o ni sm and forms of abstraction which have thwarted the emergence of genuine theological relevance. Torrance's primary contribution to genuine theological relevance is in his dedication to positi ve theology and its own proper meta-science. For in the latter he has sought through faithfu l inquiry into the proper subject matter of theology, while also listening to what other sciences have to say where there is real overlap, to bring into view the dynamic "triadic relation in which God, man, and world are in volved together in a movement of God's personal and creative interacti on with man whereby he makes himself known to him within the objectivities and intelligibilities of the empirical world. "102 In place of a passion for relevance, Torrance calls for the pursuit of a scientific objectivityioJ on the part of a realist posit ive theology. With regard to the scientific requirements of theology, he states that "the primary thing we have to note is the utter lo rdship of the Object, its absolute precedence, fo r that is the one all-determining presupposition of theology. "104 Moreover, it is "within our creaturely existence that God has condescended to objectify Himself for us,"105 and in

J esus Christ he has taken our human objectivity up into union with his divine Objectivity.106 However, because God has o bj ectified himself within the spatio-temporal universe, a theol­ ogy that would be both scientific and relevant must be conducted in dialogue with other sciences. With respect to God 's self-revelatio n, Torrance states: If we interpret that se lf-revelation, however, within the context of this scientific revolutio n, far from finding it a menace, we find that our basic C hristian convictions are clarified and fortified and are give n an even deeper relevance to the exciting world that dail y opens out to our scientific inquiries. 101 Through the a bove fa ithful inquiry into real relations, a realist theology wi ll , according to Torrance, be mightily relevant to human existence within the created spatio-temporal universe. By penetrating more deeply into the very fabric of the C hristian gospel, Torrance firmly believes that there wi ll fo ll ow a wide range of benefi cial fallout for human li fe with a ll its suffering and confusion. Of course, the genuine relevance of the C hristian faith and gospel, grounded in pertinent real relations (o nto-relations), may not be apparent to all those who hear it, for there may be a lack of relevance on their part. It is in his call for the latter that T orrance also contributes substantially to the promotion of theological relevance. This other relevance, given prominence by Torrance, is very much bound up with how theology ought to be pursued and may be described generally as being rightly related to the subject matter of the C hristian fa ith, especia lly its supreme Object. As we noted above with regard to theological discipline as shaped by o bedient questioning, here the hearer of the Word of God has hi s or her own questions questioned even as the formulation of relevant questi ons is demanded. To many on the post-Enlightenment modern and contemporary scene, this may appear to be an inversion if not a perversio n of a proper quest fo r relevance. Torrance, however, is hardly intent o n compl ying with popular noti o ns and trends. He states that scientific questi o ns must be "appropriate to the nature of the o bject, "108 and that

30 it is not always easy "to refu se to push a question beyond its relevance. " 109 He also says that "we must have particular principles of knowledge relevant to each particular fi eld or ob­ ject, " 11 0 therefore, "theology must have its particular principles relevant to this unique object or field of knowledge where divine self-disclosure is involved. "111 There is also the "persist­ ent relevance of an analogue to the nature of the reality into which we inquire,"112 which is one way of describing how the validity of proposed theories are demonstrated. F ina ll y, it should be added that the relevance being discussed here can only arise out of human re­ pentance before and humble obedience to God's own Word and Truth. Torrance says that theological statements are "progressively deepened and clarified through the Church's wor­ ship and dialogue and repentant rethinking within the whole communion of saints. " 11 3 Along the same line he says that "theological communication and understanding always involve a movement of reconciliation"l 14 fo r "theology is at bottom essentially practical, for the epistemic relation is grounded upon atoning acts and is completed in the reception of forgiveness. " 11s In concluding this presentation of Torrance's special se rvice to theological relevance, I cite his bold cha llenge to positive theology to be in the vanguard with res pect to the needed transformation of outmoded and widely held theoretical assumptions and cultural biases, taken over uncritically from past systems of thought. Because of the latter, what has hap­ pened is that oftentimes the relations between God and his creation, human beings in particular, along with fitting and therefore re levant doctrinal formulations giving expression to those relations, have in varying degrees been distorted through what is really the fabrica­ tion of a false relevance, and at times have even been ecl ipsed. In such instances Christian theology itself has a ro le to pl ay in making its own rightful relevance once again apparent. Torrance challenges churchmen "to follow the example of the Greek Fathers in undertaking the courageous, revolutionary task of a Christian reconstruction of the foundations of cul­ ture: nothing less is worthy of the Christi an Gospel. "116 Elsewhere he says that "as in the early centuries of our era so to-day Christianity must contribute creatively to the controlling id eas of this scientific culture if it is to take deeper root and grow within it. "1 17 Torrance has contributed to a renewed perce ption of the true relevance of Christian theology by calling it away from a fa lse conformity to prevailing cultural assumptions and biases, from mere defensive reaction to esta blished and new patterns of thought, and by challenging theologi­ ans to participate in rooting out those paradigms of society 118 which eclipse or distort the re levance of the gospel and hinder ge nuine theological advance. As Torrance himself says: It is, therefore , up to us as theologians to develop theology on its own proper ground in this scientific context, if only because this is the kind of theology needed to change the foundations of modern life and culture, and the kind of theology that can support the message of the Gospel to mankind, as, in touch with the advances of natural science, theology comes closer and closer to a real understanding of the creation as it came fr om the hand of God. 119

31 FOOTNOTES Torrance's Theological Position 1 Thomas F. T orrance, "Justifica ti on: Its Radica l N ature and Pl ace in Reformed Doctrine and Life." 7heolof!.y in flemnstructi11 11 (Lo nd on: SCM Press, 1965), p. 165. This title is hereafter abbreviated TR. 'Sec T ho mas F. Torrance, " Preface," 7!1eotoxital Science (Lond on: Oxford Un ive rsit y Press, 1969), p. xi ii, where T orran ce states that "modern theology in it s distincti ve fo rm bega n with John Calvin 's /11s1i1we (?l the Christian Re li~io n , fo r in it there emerged three primary features of modern sc ientific thinking." This title is hereafter abbre­ viated 7X

J T homas F. To rrance, " Preface," God mu / Ratio11ali1 v (Lo ndon: Oxford Uni ve rsi ty Press, 197 1). p. vi ii . This title is hereaft er abbreviated GR. . 4 Tho mas F. To rrance, Chris/\ Wol'l.l.v (Jcdburgh: The Unity Press, 198 1), p. 4. ' Thomas F. T orrance, "The Nature of T heology," 7!1e School of Fai1h: The Ca1echis111s of 1he /le/u r111 ed C/111rch (Lond on: James Clarke & Co. Limited, 1959), p. x I iii . This title is hereafter abbreviated SF. '' Tho mas F. T o rrance, "The Int eracti on of Theology with Scientific Development ," TS, pp. 67-68: see also "The Nature of Theology," S F, pp. 1- 1v. 7 "The Interacti on of Theology with Scientific Development ," TS. pp. 86, 96: see also T homas F. To rrance, " Predes­ tinati on in Christ," 77ie £van)iefital Quar1er(1'. Vo l. X III , No. 2 (i\pril. 1941) , pp. 108- 14 1. '"Justificatio n: It s Radical Nature and Place in Reformed Doctrine and Life," TR, pp. 150-168, sec especia lly p. 16 1. where the ex pressions so/a fide. so/a gratia, and .wla scn/Jlura are used in reference to such justificati on; sec also "The Nature of Theology," S F, p. I vii , where To rrance speaks of"this doctrine of so/us Chris1us" and then goes o n to cit e the above expressions/ doctrines. 9 "Justifi cati on: Its Radical Nature and Place in Reformed Doctrine and Life," TR, p. 164: see also Thomas F. Torrance, " Whal is the Reformed Church?," Con/lief and Aweemt'nl in 1he Clwrch, Vo l. I (Lond on: Lullerworth Press, 1959), pp. 76-89, especially p. 76. This title is hereafter abbreviated CA C. '"Thomas F. T o rra nce, "The Basic Grammar of Theology," 7he Ground and Grammar of1heotoxy (Charlollesville: Uni versit y Press of Virginia, 1980), p. 159. This title is hereafter abbreviated GG T " "Justificati o n: Its Radical Nature and Place in Reformed Doctrine and Life," TR, p. 166. 12 Thomas F. T orrance, "The Roman Doctrine of G race l'rom the Point of Vi ew of Refo rmed Theology," TR, p. 17 1. ""Whal is the Reformed Church'!," CAC, Vo l. I, p. 87, see also pp. 76, 79: see also Thomas F. T orrance, "Prefa ce,'' SF, p. vii , where he says th at "it is incumbent upon the C hurch to examine it s traditional doctrine, put it to the test of the Wo rd of God heard anew in fresh exegesis of the Holy Scriptures, and correct it where necessary as an in strument for further teac hing and instruction." Sec also "The Interaction of Theology with Scientific Develop­ ment ," TS, p. 75, where he speaks of the "conce ntrati on upon the Word of God" in the Reformation. " Tho mas F. Torrance, "The Bounds of Christian Theology,'' Reality and £vanxetical Theology (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1982), p. 49. This title is hereafter abbreviated R£T " /hid., pp. 49-50. " "The Interaction of Theology with Scientific Development," TS, p. 75: see also Thomas F. T orrance, "Ecumenism and Science," G R, p. 11 8, where he speaks of renouncing ourselves in scientific theology; see also Thomas F. T orrance, "Truth and Justification in Doctrinal Formula ti on," R£7~ p. 140, where he speaks of "a profound con ve rsion or restructuring of our own perso na l bei ng in mind and will and life" in ord er to kn ow God 's Truth. " "The Nature or Theology,'' S F, p. Ix. ""Truth and Justification in Doctrinal Formulation," R£ T, pp. 129-140. 19 /hid., p. 138: see also " Preface," TS , p. ix, where Torrance speaks of "the presence and bein g of God bearing upo n my experi ence and thought so powerfully that I cannot but be convin ced of his overwhelming realit y and rationali­ ty," 211 Tho mas F. Torrance, "Theological Realism," 7he Philosophical Fro111iers of Chrislian Tlieo/ogy: Essays presenled to D. M. Mac Kinnon, ed. Bri an Hebblethwaite and Stewart S utherl and (Cambridge: Cambridge Unive rsity Press, 1982), p. 193. This title is hereafter abbreviated PFCT Cf. Also Thomas F. Torrance, "The Method of Instruction,'' SF, p. xxxvi, wh ere he describes "rati onal worship." 21 R. D. Kerno han, "Tom Torrance: the man and the reputation," Life and Work, Vo l. 32, No. 5 (May, 1976), p. 14. " ''The Interacti on of Theology with Scientific Develomenl," TS, p. 55. l.1 /hid., pp. 55-56.

24 "Preface, " GR, p. viii . " Thomas F. T orrance, "The Nature of Truth," TS, p. 160. "'See Tho mas F. Torrance, "Preface,'' CA C, Vo l. I, p. 8, where he says that "if the reader should find some in consistencies between earlier and later essays, I would beg or him to think of me as but a scholar in the school of Christ. "

32 :! 7 Sec especia ll y Torrance's 771e Doctrine uf Grace in thl' Aposwlic l:Ctthen: Cafri11 '.\' Doc1rim• <~/" A1fa11 : Kingdom and Ch urch: A .5t1u(I' in the Theology c~/" the Rlfor111a1io11: The School of Faith: Th e Cated1isms uf the Rlfurmed Ch urC'h: A:arl !Janh: An l11trodu('fio11 to his l:..(1r(r Tlwolugr. 1910-1911: Theology in Reco 11s1r11nio11 ; and Theol­ ugr in Renmciliation: £~·says 1m1·t1rds Evangelical and Ca tholic Unity in /:.(1st and I.Vest. Torrance also edit ed wit h Geoffrey W. Bro milcy. Karl Barth 's Church Dugmarics. iii Sec especia ll y To rrance's Th eo logical Science: Space. 7i'111e mu/ /11 car11a1io11 : God and Ratio11ali1y : Space. Time and Resurrec1io 11 : Reality and E\'lmgelical Theology. Sti ll to be published arc To rran ce's Chr is tian dogmatics which he has been formu lating ove r a peri od of many years. 29 See espec iall y Torran ce's Mlhen Christ Comes and Comes Again: Th e Apoa1(rpse Today: 71ie A-ly.~· t n : \' of the Lord :\· Supper: Sermons 0 11 th

37 "Preface," Wh en Christ Comes and Comes Again , p. 9. 38 .J ohn Mci nt yre, "Thomas Forsyth Torrance," Ne 1v College Bulletin, No. JO (August, 1979), p. I.

•19 See Christ )· Words, where Torrance discusses "T he Apostolic Hinge," p. 5; see also T homas F. Torrance, "The Wo rd of God and the Res ponse of Man," G R, p. 152. ~ 1 See Claude Welch, "Theology," Religion, ed. Paul Ramsey (Englewood Cliffs, New .J ersey: Prentice- Hall , Inc .. 1965), p. 22 1, where he says that "in this essay, theology refers to that kind of refl ecti on commonly call ed sys tematic or constructive theology." He distingui shes the latt er from phil osophy of religion and biblical theology. Cf. Clyde A. Holbrook, Religion. A Humanistic Field (Englewood Cliffs, New .J ersey: Prentice-Hall , Inc .. 1963), p. 16 1, where Holbrook speaks of "systemati c th eology sometimes designated as dogmatics o r const ructi ve th eo logy," whi ch he distinguishes from hi storical theology, C f. " Preface," TS, p. xv iii , where To rrance refers to "t he positi ve and constru cti ve task of theological science." " T homas F. Torrance, "Theological Science among th e Spec ial Sciences," TS, p. 340. " "The Natu re of Theology," SF, p. I. ""The Roman Doctrine of Grace fr om the Point of View of Reformed T heo logy," TR, p. 18 1. 44 "The Nature of Theology," SF, pp. xlv-x lvi. '""Theological Science among the Special Sciences," TS, p. 34 1. "'"Prefa ce," CAC, Vo l. I. p. 7. " /hid. ""The Bounds of Christian Theology," R ET, p. 33.

•19 "Ecumeni sm and Science," GR, p. 133 . '"Thomas F. Torrance, "The T ransfo rmation of Natural Theology," GGT, pp. 75- 109. " "Prefa ce," TS, p. xv iii. " /hid., pp. viii-ix; cf. Thomas F. Torrance, "Theological Ed ucati o n Today," TR, p. 17, where he speaks of "the 'Philosophy of T heology' which corres ponds in theological stu dies to the ' Philosophy of Science' (and which every­ where today tends to displace the old -fashi oned 'Philosophy of Reli gion')."

33 .S .l "Theological Science among lhc Spec ial Sciences," TS. p . .14 1; cf. T homas F. Torran ce . "Crcalion and Science ." GG7: p. 49, where he states, "a nd by proper tlieulugy I mean 'dogmatics.' " .s.i Sec "Crcalion and Sciencc,"GGJ: p. 52. where Torra nce co nclud es lhal "il is in th at mean ing of th e term that have tried to profess C hristi an dogma ti cs at the U ni vers it y of Edinburgh." " Thomas F. Torrance, "The Place of Christology in Biblica l and Dogmatic Theology," TR. p. 146. "' /hid.. p. 148; cf. "The Roman Doct rine of Grace from th e Point of View of Refo rmed Theology," TR. pp. 190-19 1. where T orran ce ta lks aboul "th e hard wo rk of th inking ou t the profo uncl inner co nn ections of C hristian doctrine. which is th e task of dog matics." " "The Place of Christology in Biblical and Dogmatic Theology," TR, p. 147. " "Theo logical Science among th e Special Sciences," TS. p. 345. l9 /hid.. p. 348 . "' "Prefa ce," TS, pp. viii -ix.

M /hid., p. xv iii. "' "Theological Ed ucation Today," TR. p. 28: cf. Thomas F. Torrance, "Cheap and Costl y Grace," GR, p. 76, where he speaks of "the error not only of naturalism but also of a false apologetic." ""Theological Ed ucatio n Today," TR. p. 17. '" "Preface," TS, p. ix. " Thomas F. Torrance, "Theological Rationality, " GR, p. 6; cf. Thomas F. Torra nce, "Chri stianity in Scient ific Change," CTSC, p. 15, where he speaks of Chri sti an theology bein g "prepared to engage in radical and critical clarifica ti on of it s own co nce ptual tradi ti on." '~ "Prefa ce," TS. p. xv iii .

• 1 "Ecum enism and Science," GR, p. 134. " "The Bo unds of Christi an Theology," R ET, p. 36. •• Ibid. 10 "The Basic Grammar of T heology," GGT, p. 158.

11 Ibid. 12 E. L. Mascall , Theology and the Gospel ofChri;·t: A n Essay in Reorientation (London: S PC K, 1977), p. 46. Herc under "Two Constructi ve Approaches" to the nature and tas k of theology, Mascall disc usses both T. F. Torrance and Bernard Lonergan. 13 Thomas F. Torrance, "Man, the Priest of Creation," GG7: p. 7. 14 "Creation and Science, " GG7~ p. 52. 1l /hid., p. 53. "' !hid., p. 57. 11 Thomas F. Torrance, "The lnOucncc of Reformed Theology on th e Development of Scientifi c Method." TR, p. 67; cf. "The Interacti on of Theology with Scientific Development." TS, p. 75, where Torrance also speaks of th is "masterful obj ecti vit y." " "The Influence of Reformed Theology on the Development of Scientific Method." TR, p. 67.

7'I /hid. so Thomas F. Torrance, "Theological Science," GG7: p. 144. ""Preface," DCO, p. ix. sec also Thomas F. Torrance, "Determinism and Creation," DCO, p. I; "Preface," GR, p. vii ; "The Transformati on of Nat ural T heology," GG7; pp. 104-107. " "Determinism and Creati on," DCO, p. I. ""Preface," GR, p. vii. " "The Basic Grammar of T heology," GGT, pp. 146-178. ""Determinism and Creati on," DCO, pp. 1-25: see also Thomas F. Torrance, "God and the Contingent Unive rse," DCO, pp. 26-6 1. "' "Determinism and Creati on, DCO. pp. 24-25; cf. "Christianity in Scientific Change," CTSC, p. 39. 81 See Thomas F. Torrance, "Contingc nce and Disord er," DCO, pp. 128- 142, where he discusses "M an's Priestly and Redemptive Role in the World"; sec also "Man, the Priest of Creati on," GGT, pp. 1-14. 88 Thomas F. Torrance, "The Nature of Scienti fic Acti vi ty," 7S , pp. 106- 140; see also "Theological Science among the Special Sciences," 7S, pp. 28 1-352; " Preface," C7SC, pp. 8-9; Thomas F. Torrance, "Preface," RET, pp. 11 -12. 89 Thomas F. Torra nce, "The Lord of Space and Time," Space, Time and Resurrection (Edinburgh: T he Hand scl Press, 1976), p. 180. This title is hereaft er abbreviated STR. See also "Theological Science," GG'f: p. 144 , where Torrance speaks of theology "operating wit hin the continge nt intell igibilities of space and time th at it shares with natural science."

34 '" Thomas F. Torrance, " ln1 roduc1i on," S TR. p. 23: sec also "The Bounds of Chrisli an Theology.'' /?LT pp. 30. 34: "The Tra11 sfo rma1io 11 of Nalural Theology.'' GGT. p. 94: "Preface.'' 7S, pp. xii -x iii . " "Preface.'' C ISC. p. 8. " "Crca1i o n and Science.'' GG 7: p. 73: see also "Theological Science," GGT. p. 145. '" "Prefa ce.'' RET. p. 11 : see also "Preface.'' CTSC. p. 9: "Creati o n and Science.'' GGT. p. 45. ""The Lord of Space and Ti me." S TR. p. 180. " "Crea1ion and Science.'' GG 7: p. 45.

9l> "Preface," GI? . p. viii . " "Theological Ed uca1i on Today. " TR, p. 26. " /hid. 99 /hid.

Touchstones of Torrance's Theological Method 1 "The lnleraclio n of Theology wi 1h Scienlific Development," TS. pp. 104- 105 . ' Thomas F. Torrance, "The Edipse of' God." GR. p. 52. see also p. 53; and T homas F. Torrance. "Theology in the Scien1ific World." G R, pp. 92-93 .

.i T ho mas F. Torrance, "The Knowledge of God ," TS. p. 9, er. p. 10. where he states 1ha1 an inquiry aboul how somclhing ca n be known can o nl y be co nduclcd on the basis of ac1ual knowledge of it. ' Thomas F. Torrance, "The Epis1emological Relevance of 1he Holy Spiril ." GR. p. 165. '"Truth and Justificati on in Doclrinal Formul at io n," RE7: p. 136. • "lntrod ucli o n." STR. p. 20. see also pp. 17, 22. 25. for further discussion of these ultimates: see also Thomas F. Torrance. "A Re ali st lnlerpretation of God's Self-Revelati on," RET. pp. 105- 106. 7 Cf. Thomas F. Torrance, "U ll imale Beliefs and the Scien1ific Revolution." Cross Curre111s. Vol. XXX. No. 2 (Summer, 1980), pp. 129- 149. 'Thomas F. Torrance. "Theological Ques 1i ons 10 Biblical Scholars," RET. p. 57.

'1 "lnl roduction," STR, p. 15: see also "Ultimate Beliefs and the Scientific Revolu1i on," Cross Curre111s. p. 130: "Theological Questions to Biblical Scholars," RET, p. 83. 111 "The Kn owledge of God," 7S, p. 27. 11 See "The Bounds of Christian Theology.'' RET, p. 32. where Torrance speaks of lhal natural 1heology which seeks to throw "a logical bridge between the world and God if only lo give some kind of rati o nal suppo rl for failh ": see also Thomas F. Torrance, "Preface," GG7: pp. x-x i. " "Theological Ed ucati on Today," TR, p. 26. u Ibid 14 T homas F. Torrance, "The Deposit of Faith," Scouish Journal of 71ieo/ogy, Vol. 36. No. I ( 1983). p. 8. ""The lnleraction of Theology with Scientific Development," TS, p. 55. ""Man, the Priest of Crcali on," GGT, p. 8. " Ibid. , p. 9. " T ho mas F. Torrance, "The Place and Function of Reason in Christian T heology," The Evangelical QuarterzJ1, Vol. XIV , No. I (January, 1942), p. 35. 19 "Truth and Juslification in Doctrinal Formulati o n," RE7: p. 156; cf. "The Nature of Truth," TS, p. 145. where Torrance discusses how our statements aboul the absolute T ruth are relati vized by the latter. 211 "The Ecli pse of God," GR, p. 34; see also "Theology in the Scientific World ," GR, p. 90. 21 "Truth and Just ification in Doctrinal Formulation," RE1: p. 154- 155. 22 "The Kn owledge of God," TS, p. 37. 23 'Truth and Justification in Doctrinal Formulati on," RE7; pp. 151- 153. 24 Ibid., p. 139, here Torrance emphasizes that the eternal Truth of God was personal before he became incarnale. ""The Basic Grammar of T heology," GGT, p. 158 .

21' Ibid., p. 157; sec also "The Bounds of Christian Theology," RET, p. 36. 27 "Trulh and Justification in Doctrinal Formulation," RE7; p. 154. " Ibid. 2• Ibid. , p. 136. ~'Ibid ., p. 137; sec also "The Nature of Truth," TS, p. 186. 31 "T he Deposil of Faith," Sco11ish Journal of Theology, p. 4.

35 " /hid., pp. 2. 6, 13; see also "The Nature of Truth," TS. p. 192; "The Word of God and the Response of Man," GR, pp. 152- 153 .

.B "The Word of God and the Response of Man," GR, p. 152. 34 "The Deposit of Faith ," Seo/fish Journal of T71eo logy, p. 14. " /hid .. p. 15. l<• /hid .. p. 14.

J7 "The Nature of Truth," TS, pp. 158, 192, 200-202. ""The Deposit of Faith," Seo11ish Journal of 77reology, p. 14. J9 /hid. , p. 19.

111 • "The Nature of Truth," TS, p. 192. ""Prefa ce," RET, p. 17, see also p. 18; and Thomas F. Torrance, "A Reali st Interpretati on of God's Sclf- Revclat ion," RET, pp. 96, 119. 42 "A Rea li st Interpretati on of God's Sel f-Revelation," RET, p. 119. 43 "Theological Science among the Special Sciences," TS, p. 348. 44 "A Rea li st Interpretation of God's Self-Revelation," RET, p. 120. ""Cheap and Costl y Grace," GR, p. 68. "'"Truth and Justification in Doctrinal Formulation," R E7~ p. 148. " /hid. . p. 154. " /hid.. p. 15 1; sec also "Theological Reali sm," PFC 7~ p. 180, whe re Torrance cites "what the great Alexandria n theologians ca lled the awousia and autexousia, the se lf-being and se lf-authority, of God."

4 1 ' "Truth and Justificati on in Doctrin al Formulati on," RET, p. 154. ~ 1 "The Wo rd of God and the Response of Man," GR, p. 156. " "Truth and .Justification in Doctrin al Formulation," RET, p. 138. "·'The Word of God and the Res ponse of Man." GR, p. 153. ' ·'"The Deposit of Faith," Sm11ish Journal of Theolol{y, p. 13. " /hid.. p. 14. ""A Realist Interpretation of God's Self-Re velation," RET. p. 96. " "Theo logical Science among the Special Sciences. " TS, p. 342. " "Truth and Justi fica tion in Doctrinal Formulation," RET, p. 151. ""The Bounds of Christian Theology." RE7: pp. 21-22; see also "Theo logical Science among the Special Sciences," TS. p. 28 1. n. I. where Torrance al so refers to Duns Scotus' distinction between theologia in se and theologia in nohis or 110s1ra theo/ogia . ''' "The Bounds of Christian Theology," R ET, p. 22 . "' /hid. " /hid. f\2 /hid

1 1 '· /h id. '" "The Depos it of Faith." Sm11ish .loumal 1!(" 7heologv, " p. 8. " /hid.. p. 9. "''"The Epistemological Relevance of th e Holy Spirit ." GR. p. 19 1. " /hid.. p. 182. ''' "The Na tu re of Truth." TS. p. 198. "'"U ltim ate Bclicls and the Scientific Revolution." Cross Currellls. p. 146.

7" See \Volniart Pannenberg. Jesus-God and Man. trans. Lewis L. Wilkins and Duane A. Priebe (Philadel phia: The Westminster Press. 1968). es pecially pp. 20-37.

71 /hid. p. 28. " "Theological Realism." PFC7: pp. 189- 190; "The Bounds of Christian Theology," R ET. pp. 39-42; "Theological Questi ons to Bib li cal Scholars." REY: pp. 57-58; "Introducti on." S TR. p. 12: "The Lord of Space and Time." S T!?. p. 185: "T h eo l ogic~ I Science." GG 7: pp. 11 7- 123. 1.1 "The Basic Grammar of Theology." GGT: pp. 157- 158. ""Introducti on." S TR. p. 22. ""The Basic Grammar of Theology." GGT. pp. 157. "'"Theological Rea li sm. " PFCT. pp. 182- 183. 189-190; " Prefa ce." GG T: pp. x-x i; "Theological Science." GG 7: pp. 120- 121; "Theological Ques ti ons to Biblical Scholars. " RE7: p. 57. 36 77 "Theological Realism," PFCT. p. 189. ""Introd uction," S TR, pp. 17-26. ''' "Creati on and Science," GG7: p. 45, sec also p. 75: and "The Bound s or Christi an T heology," R ET, pp. 27, 50. '"Sec "The Bounds of Christi an Theology," /?ET, p. 39: and "The Knowledge of God," TS, p. 34, n. I, where Torrance ex plains what he means by the word "empirical. " ""Theological Rea li sm," PFCT, p. 190. " "Theological Science," GGT, p. 11 7. ""Theological Realism," PFC 1 ~ p. 185. 84 /hid., pp. 185- 186. " Ibid., p. 185.

' 6 "The Bounds or Christian Theology," RE1.: pp. 34-4 1; see also " Introducti on," S TR, p. 23; "The Lo rd or Space and Time," STR, pp. 180, 190: "Creati on and Science," GG 7: p. 45: "The Basic Grammar of Theology," GGT, p. 170: " Determi nism and Creati on," DCO, p. I. 87 "The Bound s of Christian Theology," RET, pp. 34-35. s11 Thomas F. Torrance. "Incarnation and Space and Time," Space, Time and /11 car11ation (Lo nd on: Oxford Uni ver- sit y Press, 1969), p. 90. This tit le is hereaft er abbreviated S 7J. 89 "Theological Realism," PFC1: p. 190: see also "Theological Science," GGT, p. 120. ~ 1 " Introduction," S TR, p. 22. " "Theological Questi ons to Biblical Scholars," RET, p. 57. " "Determinism and Creation," DCO, p. 25: see also "T heological Questi ons lo Biblical Scholars," RET, pp. 57, 80-8 1: "Theological Reali sm," l'FCT, pp. 189- 190; "Theological Science," GG 7; pp. 11 9-124. ""Theological Science," GGT. p. 122. " /hid., p. 123. ""Theological Questions to Bib lical Scholars," RET, pp. 57-58.

9• "Theological Science," GGT. p. 120.

97 'Theology in the Scientific World ," GR, p. 90: see also "The Knowledge or God," TS, p. 34. 9' "Theology in the Scientific World," GR. p. 90. "" /hid., p. I 00.

IOll /hid., pp. 100- 101. "" Thomas F. Torrance, "Problems of Logic," TS, p. 214. 1112 !hid. IO J Ibid., p. 216. "" "Theo logical Science." GGT. p. 123.

Cardinal Facets of Torrance's Theology 1 "Tom Torrance: the man and the reputation." L{/e and Work, p. 14. ' /hid. J /hid 4 When Christ Comes and Comes AKai11 , pp. 180- 192. ' /hid., pp. 18 1- 182. ' T homas F. Torrance, "Doctrinal Tendencies," S F, p. lxxi. 1 The headings in TR arc:"!. Kn owledge of God"; " II . Through Jes us Christ": "Ill. And in the Holy Spirit. " '"The Basic Grammar of Theology," GG7: pp. 158-159. 1 ' Sec hi s di sc ussion of "The Doct rinc or Goel ," and "God in Christ." in "Doctrinal Tend encies." S F, pp. I xx- I xx iii : also sec "The Basic Grammar or Thco logy,"GG7: pp. 146- 148. '" "The Basic Grammar or T heology," GG 'f: p. 148.

II /hid., pp. 156- 158. 12 "The Bounds of Christian Theology." RCI: p. 36. CL T homas F. Torrance. "Athanasiu s: A Sllldy in th e Fou nda­ ti ons of Classical Theology," '/11 eology in Reconciliatiun: £\·says towarll\· EvanKe lical and Catholic Unity in &1s1 and West (Grand Rapids. MI: Wm . B. Ee rd mans Publish in g Co., 1975). pp. 253-254: here Torrance says that the th eo logy of Sl. A thanasi us "carries th eo logy co nsisten tl y forwa rd from th e 'cco nmnic Trinity' in to 'the on tologica l Trinit y'. for what God is in th e eco nomy of hi s saving operati ons towards us in Jesus Christ he is ant ecedently and inherentl y and eternally in himse lf as the Triun e Goel ." p. 253. T hi s latter title is hereafter abbreviated TR£.

1.1 "The Basic Grammar of Theology." GG7: p. 159. 37 14 !hid., p. 158; cf. " Prcracc," RCt: p. 14; "The IJ ounds or Christian Theology," RE7~ p. 23; "Athanasiu s: A Study in the Foundations or Classical T heology," TRE, pp. 240-24 1. ""The IJasic Grammar or Theology," GG7; p. 160. 11' !hid. , pp. 160-166; er. "i\thansiu s: i\ Study in the Foundations or Classical Theology," TR E, pp. 224-239; also "Theological Realism," PFC 7~ pp. 185- 193. 17 "i\thanasiu s: A Study in the Foundations or Classical Theology," TRE, p. 236; cf. " Preface," RET, pp. 14-15. ""Athanasiu s: i\ Study in the Foundations or Classica l Theology," Tl?E, p. 236.

1'' "The Bo unds or Christian Theology," RE7; p. 43; cf. "Truth and .Justificati on in Doctrinal Formulatio n," R£7: pp. 139- 140; also "The IJasic Grammar or Theology," GGT. pp. 173-174. "'"The Basic Grammar or Theology," GG 7: p. 173. 21 !hid.; cf. "The Bounds or Christian Theology," Rcr: pp. 42-44; also "Truth and Justilication in Doctrinal Formu- lati on," /?E7: pp. 139-140. 21 "The Ep istemological Relevance or the Holy S pirit," GR, p. 171. 2J /hid., p. 189. 24 !hid., pp. 171- 172. " /hid. 21• "Cheap and Costl y Grace," GR. p. 80. " "Foreword ," TRE, p. 9. " Thomas F. Torrance, "The Relevance or the Doctrin e or the S pirit for Ecumeni cal Theology," TR, p. 230. 2'1 "The IJasic Grammar or Theology," GG7~ pp. 177- 178. '" /hid., p. 177 . .i i Thomas F. Torrance, "Introduction," CA C, Vo l. I, p. 19. 32 "Tom Torran ce: the man and the reputation," L!f'e and Work , p. 14. J.l /hid. "'"The Basic Grammar or Theology," GG7; p. 160. " /hid. '" "Problems or Logic," TS. p. 207 . n "The Basic Grammar or Theology," GG7: p. 165. ""Problems of Logic," TS, p. 216. '''"Doctrinal Tendencies," SF, p. lxxiii. "' "The Nature or Scientific Acti vit y," TS, pp. 137- 138. 41 "Tom Torrance: the man and the reputation ," Life and Work , p. 14. 42 Thomas F. Torrance, "The Mind or Christ in Worship: T he Problem or Apollinarianism in the Liturgy," TRE, p. 209. ""The Nature or Truth," TS, p. 186. 14 ' "The Word or God and the Response of Man," GR, p. 138. ·ll "Cheap and Costly Grace," GR, p. 76. "'"The Word or God and the Response or Man," GR, p. 158. 47 "The Basic Grammar or Theology," GGT: p. 160. " Ibid., pp. 160- 16 1. 49 Sec "Preface," GGT, p. xi, where Torrance points out "when the doctrine or the Trinity is fou nd to constitute the ultimate unitary basis on which a clarifica tion and simplificatio n of all the ology may be carried out." "Sec T homas F. Torrance, "Emerging from the C ultural Split," GGT, pp. 15-43. " See "Theology in the Scientific World ," GR, pp. 103-111. " !hid. , p. 110. 53 See "The Bounds or Christi an T heology," RET, pp. 31-34; also "Emerging from the Cultural Split ," GGT, pp. 15-43; and "Theology in the Scientific World," GR, pp. 103- 111. " Sec "Christianity in Scientific Change," CTSC, p. 31, where Torrance discusses the "unit ary rati onal order" of the universe, and p. 37, where he speaks or "the stratified structure of the unive rse" and "the coordinated layers or orderly relations in realit y itself. " On p. 37, he also describes what he calls "the principle of coherent integration from above." " In "Theological Science among the Special Sciences," TS, p. 329, Torrance criticizes Bultmann's "radical dichoto­ my between God and the world"; and in connection with J ohn Robinson, Bishop or Woolwich, he notes the prese nce or this same radical dichtomy, sec Thomas F. Torrance, "A New Reformation?," TR, p. 277; for Tarran-

38 ce's discussion of lhe radical dicholomy bcl wcc n th e se nsible and th e intelligible world s. sec Thomas F. Torrance. "The Problem of Theological Statement Today," TR. p. 47: and Thomas F. Torrance. "K nowledge of God and Speech about him according to J ohn Calvin ." TR. pp. 78. 88: sec also "Theological Rationality." GR. p. 4. where Torrance cit es the "d isastrous dichotomies be twee n thought and life. reaso n and be haviour. Jaw and nature. fou nd in our modern cu lture." l• T ho mas F. Torrance. "The Pri orit y of Belief." CTSC. pp. 47-49: see also "The Knowledge of God." TS. p. 14: "Theology in the Scientific World," Gil. p. 106: and "The Basic Grammar of Theo logy," GGT. p. 149: in each of these lallcr th ree places Torrance cit es Martin Buber's talk. fou nd in his The frlipse of God. of a " 'conceptual lclling go of God'" to which both Bube r and Torrance arc opposed. " "The Priority of Belief." CTSC. p. 48: Torrance also spea ks of the disintegratio n of the abstracted phenomenal surface in "Emerging fr om the Cultural Split ." GGT. p. 32. " Sec "Theological Science." GGT. pp. 121-123 : "Christi anit y in Scientific Change." CTSC. p. 21: and "Determinism and Creation." DCO. p. 25: in these places Torrance notes the great difficulty that arises when we arc left with onl y the appearances of Jes us and then have to seek to make sense of them simply o n the same level as other observed phenomena. ""Theological Questions to Biblical Scholars," RET. p. 57: cf. "Christianity in Scientific Change." CTSC. p. 25. '~"E m erging from the Cultu ral Split." GGT: p. 32. " "The Priority of Belief," CTSC. p. 48: cf. "Ecumenism and Science," GR. p. 134: also "Problems of Logic," TS. pp. 216, 264-265. ""Preface." GGT. pp. ix-x i. ""Theologica l Realism," PFCT. p. 184. "' "The Transformation of Natural T heology," GGT. p. 93: cf. "Athanasiu s: A Stud y in the Found ations of Classical Theology, TR/:.~ pp. 257-258. "'"The Transformati on of Natu ra l Theology," GG7: p. 93. «•"Theologica l Rea lism," PFC7: p. 185. ,,, /hid. "" !hid.. p. 182: cf. "Emerging from the Cultural Split." GGT. pp. 20-2 1. 27. '"''The Bounds of Christi an Theology." /?E.7: p. 32: see also "The Prio rit y of Belief. " CTSC. pp. 57-58: Thomas F. Torrance. "The Theology of Light ," CTSC. p. 75: Thomas F. Torrance. "Wo rd and Number." CTSC. pp. 129. 143- 144. 711 "Preface," GG7: p. xi: Torrance also discusses the "un ity in God" in "Word and Numbe r. " CTSC. p. 126. 71 "Theological Science," GG 7: p. 123: cf. "Theological Rea li sm," PFCT. pp. 184-1 85: also "Word and Number." C f SC. p. 126. where Torrance says that "i n the one Person of J es us Christ there is in clu ded a union not only of un crea ted Light and crcCJt ed li ght . un crea ted R ati onalily and crea ted rationality. but of uncrea ted W ord and crea ted word." 72 "Christianity in Scient ific Change," CTSC. p. 39. " "Determinism and Creation," DCO. pp. 24-2 5. 74 "Preface." GGT. p. ix. ""Athanasius: /\Study in the Found ati o ns of Classical Theology," TR£. p. 264: cf. "Theological Rea li sm." PFCT, pp. 185-189. "'"Ecumenism and Science," GR. p. 134: cf. "Doctrinal Tendencies." SF, p. lxxv. 77 " Pro blems of Logic," 7S, p. 215: cf. "The Place and Fun cti on of Reason in Christi an Theology." 7/1e Evanr,elica/ Quarlerfr, p. 39. " /hid., p. 24 1. 71 ' "A Reali st Interpretation of God's Self-Reve lation," /?£7: p. 106. ~ 1 "Preface," GGT: p. ix. " !hid. " "Prefa ce," DCO. p. x. " /hid " "Knowledge of God and Speech about him according to .John Calvin," TR, p. 82. "See "The Roman Doctrine of Grace from the Point of View of Reformed Theology," TR, p. 189, where Torrance refers to Calvin's and the Reformed theologians' "rejec ti on of norninalism." "'"The Basic Grammar of T heology." GGT, p. 169. " "Theological Q uestions to Biblical Schola rs," RET: p. 63. " lln°d.. p. 58.

39 ''' /hit!. ; sec also "Theological Rea li sm." i'FC7: pp. 169- 170. where Torrance sets forth th e cont rast betwee n realism and id ea li sm in view of the thing signified and the sign. "'"Theological Realis m." PFC7: pp. 169- 170; cf. "Theologica l Questi o ns to Biblical Scholars," RE7: p. 59.

'11 "Prefa ce." /iE7: p. 12. '""The Bounds of Christian Theology.'' R E 7~ pp. 28-29. 11 ' · " /\ Realist lnlcrprelation of God's Self-Revelati on." RE7: p. 96; sec al so 771eoloxical Science where Torrance refers in severa l places lo transparent media; also "The Pro blem of Theological Statement Today," TR, p. 54, where he desc ribes these tran sparent media. '""Theological Realism," PFC T: p. 176. '" /hit!. ; sec also "Athanas iu s: A Study in th e Fo undations of Class ical Theology," TR E, p. 239, where T orrance prese nts St. /\thanasiu s' teachin g on kn owing "God in his inner intelligible relati ons as Father, So n and Holy Spirit" through th e Spirit. """Kn owl edge of God and Speech abo ut him acco rding to .J ohn Cal vin ," TR. p. 84. 97 /hit!. . p. 91.

'lie /hid.: sec also " Preface." TS. pp. xiii-xiv, where T orrance rclCrs to Calvi n's placing of primary emphas is on the quale sit ques ti on over aga in st the quid sit and an sit ques tions; Torrance states: "Thus instead of starting with abstract questi ons as to esse nce and poss ibil ity, he [Cal vi nl started with th e questi on as to actu alit y, 'What is th e nature of thi s thing that we have here?' which in th eological kn owledge beco mes the question as to who God is and as to what He reveals of Himself." Cf. "The Ec lipse of God.'' GR. pp. 33-35. "' "Knowledge or God and Speech about him acco rding to J ohn Calvin ." TR. p. 9 1. """The Bounds or Christian Theology." RE"T: p. 50. "" "/\ Realist Interpretation of God's Selr-Rcvc\ation." /? E7: p. 96: cf. "The Bounds or Christian Theology," R E 7~ p. 42. """Preface." l iE7~ p. 11.

111-' /hid ; cf. "Theological Realism." PFC !: pp. 188- 189. """The Bounds or Christian Theology. " /?Cr. p. 36: sec also "Creatio n and Science," GG 7: p. 45; and "The Trans­ formation of Natural Theology." GGT. p. 75. "" Sec "The Nature of Truth," 7S. pp. 14 1-16 1: "Truth and .Justificati on in Doctrinal Formulation," RET. pp. 12 1- 156: and the above secti on entitled Level\· cd' 7hah. Awlwrity. and Kncm ·letlx<).

111'' "Truth and .Ju stificati on in D oc trinal Fo rmulati on." RET. p. 154.

111 7 "The Kn owledge or God." TS. p. 9. "" "The Place and Function of Reason in Christian Theology.'' 71w Evrmiwlical Q11ar1er(I'. pp. 23-24.

Jl>I /hid . p. 22. """Problems of Logic.'' TS. pp. 204. 246-263: but also sec with regard lo the knowledge of God the strict qualifica­ ti on which Torrance places on "a di sc ursive process ." in "The Kn owledge of God." TS. p. 14. and "di scursive thought.'' ihid. p. 37. "' "Problems or Logic," TS. p. 26-1. " ' /hit!. 1 11 · On such limits sec "T heological Ratio nalit y.'' G I? . p. 11 : 'T heology in th e Scicntilic World.'' GR. pp. 100- 10 I: "Problems of Logic.'' TS. p. 277; "The Nature or Theology.'' SF. pp. xlii i-x lvi. '" "The Kn owledge of God." 7S. p. 11 . see al so p. 12: and "The Interacti o n or T heology with Scientific Develop­ ment .'' TS. p. 9-1. " ' "Word and Number." C7SC. p. 144: sec also "Prefa ce:· 7S. p. ix: and "Preface." GI? . p. vii .

11 1• "Theologica l Science among the Special Sciences." TS. p. -14 7: cf. "The Basic Gra mmar of Theology." GG T. p. 167. 11 7 " Knowledge or God and Speech about him accordi ng to J ohn Calvin ." TR. p. 95; cf. " Pre fa ce.'' 7S. p. xi: 'Theological Science among the Special Sciences.'' TS. pp. -11 7-322: "Prefa ce." RE7: p. 11 : and "Wo rd and Number." CTSC. pp. 112- 11 4. " ' "The Problem o r Theological Statement Today. " 7R. p. 57: cf. "The Nature of Truth.'' TS. p. 198: and "Christian­ it y in Scicntilic Change." CTSC. pp. -1 5-.16.

1"1 "The Priority of Belief.'' C7SC. p. 58: cf. "Theology in the Scientific World. " GR. p. JOO : and T homas F. Tor­ rance. "Theological. Persuasion ." GR. pp. 200-20 I. """Theology in th e Scientific World.'' G /?. p. JOO . 1 ~ 1 Sec "Thcologi1: al Science am ong the Spec ial Sciences." 7S. p. J22. where T orrance speak s nf th e "rat io nalit y intrinsic to" the "actual subjcc t-lllaltcr" or "hi storica l inqu iry "' /hit!. . p . .1 25.

40 121 "The Priorit y or 13elief. " CTSC. p. 69. 114 /hid.. p. 70. m /hid.

121. /hie/. 111 "The Place and Functi on or Reason in Christian Theology." Till' Ev1111xelical Q11arter(I'. p. 22; cf. "The Knowledge of God." TS. p. 54. llx "The Place and Functi on of Reaso n in Christi an Theology," 71w Evangelical Quart er~\'. p. 22. '""The Me thod or Instruction," SF. p. xxxv. '·" /hid. p. xxxvi; cf. "Theological Realism," l'FC T: p. 19.1. "" "The Transformation of Natural T heology." GG '/: pp. 75- 109. ' " /hid.. p. 92; sec also ihid.. pp. 87-9.1; cf. "The 13asic Grammar of Theology," GGT. p. 147; and Thomas F. Torrance. " Prefa ce," S T!?. pp. ix-x. ' "Sec "Preface." .\"JR. p. ix; "The 13ound s or Christian T heology," 1?1::7: p. 33; "The 13asic Grammar of Theology," GGT p. 147; and "Ecumeni sm and Science." GI?. p. 1.1.1.

11-1 "Ecumenism and Science," GI?. p. 1.1.1: sec also "Doctrinal Tend encies." SF. p. lxx. where Torrance speaks of a prior "philosophical o nt ology" on lo whi ch "the Biblical idea of God was added." and p. lxx i. where Torrance stales that "t he doctrine of tl1 c T rinit y had to be mad e to fit in wi th the basic ont ology through alleged vest1Kia 7i'i11i1a1is in creaturely being"; and "The Roman Doct ri ne or Grace fro m the Point of Vi ew of Reformed Theol­ ogy." Tll. p. 178. where he says "so that in the last resort Roman theology appeared LO be subordinated to a philosophical o nt ology." " ' "The lnll ucncc or Reformed Theology o n the Development of SeientiGc Method." Tl?. p. 63; cf. "The Transforma­ tion or Na tural Theology." GGT: p. 82; and T ho mas F. Torrance. "The Eschatology of the Reformation," Ki11x­ t!o111 11111/ C/111rc/i: A Slll<(r in 1/ie 7lwologr o( 1/ie l?e/i1mw1i<111 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1956). pp. 1-2.

1.11• "The ll ounds or Christian T heo logy." !?ET. p . .1 2; 'The Transformation of Natural Theology," GG7: pp. 76. 79; "Preface." ST/I. p. ix.

II) "The Transformation or Na tural Theology." GG7: p. 76. ' " "The Bounds o r C hristian Theo logy." /?i, 7: p . .12; sec also "Preface." GGT pp. x-x i; on the implicati ons of justifi ca ti on by grace alone for epi stemology and vc rili ca tion sec "Ju stilica ti on: It s Radical Na ture and Place in Refo rm ed Doctrine and Life." Tli. pp. 163- 164; also "The Transformation of Na tu ra l Theology." GG7~ p. 90. fo r Barth \ cmphasi!'i on these implications of justilication by grace alone.

1.N " !'reface." S7R. p. ix. l-IU "The Transfo rmation or Na tural Theology." GG '/ : p. 92.

1-11 "Preface ," STU. p. ix. '" /hid

1·" "The Transformation or Na tural Theology." GCiT. p. 9.1: sec ihid.. pp. 9 1-9.1 for th e full er acco unt of Barth's po si tion : al so "Prdw..:c." .\'TN. pp . ix-x.

1-1-1 "The Transformation or N;it urnl ·rheology." GG'/: p. 92. l -1 \ !hid.: sec al so "Inca rn ation and Space and Time." STU. pp. 69-70: and "Preface." ,\'TR. pp. ix-x. '"' "Preface." ST!?. p. x. 147 "The T ransfo rm ati o n of Na tural Theology." GGT p. 9.1.

I-I X //,;(/.

1-1•1 /hid. '·' '"The Bounds of Christian Theology." llET: p . .14.

Ill "The Transformatio n or Na tural Theology." GG 7: p. 94. '" /hid '" "The Bounds or Christian Theology." R/:'7: p . .1 1. "·' Sec ihid.. p . .12; "Preface." GGT pp. x-x i; "The Transformation or Natural Theo logy," GG'I: p. 80. and also pp. 99- 100. where Torrance opposes unc.Jcrsta nding St. Anse lm's ont ological argument as some kind of logical or inferential argumen t. '" "The Transformation or N;itural Tl1 eology." GGJ: p. 94; sec " Preface." C7SC. p. 8. where Torrance states that he doc:. not intend "t hat th eology should tak e int o its materia l content id eas that deri ve rrom natural se icnti lil.: knowlcc.lge or th e uni ve rse. any more than nat ura l science shou ld in corporate into its developing stoc k of id eas distinct ly the ological co ncep tion s": al so "The Bounds of Christi an Theology." RE1': pp . JO-J I. where Torrance desc rib es hoth th e ove rlap as we ll as th e diffcrcm:cs and di stinctive objec ti ves of theo logica l sc ience and natural sc ience.

1 ~ 1 • "The T ra n ~ rormation of ntural T heo logy." Gli"/~ p. 94.

41 m "The Bound :-. o l C hr i ~ tian T heo logy." U/:·T p. 14. '"" "The T ran!\ lormation of Natura l Theology ... c;c; ·1 ~ p. 94. ,.. ., /hid. iw /hid .. p. 99: ~ce al\o th e abo ve !\e<.:t ion entit led A U<11 io11al 7heo logr. and what Torran ce ha :-. to :-. ay abou t lonnal log ical and di !\c ur~ i vc ope rat io n ~. and th e l im it ~ and quali fi cati on!\ he impo se!'! on th em eve n a!\ they arc subordi ­ nat ed lO major kind s or ra tiona lit y.

11.i "The Tn111 !\ ronnatio n of Na tural Theo logy." GG'f. p. 100.

H>.! /hit/.

1" ' !hid.. pp. 104- 107.

lf>.I /h id .. p. I0 5: cf. ihid .. p. 107. where Torrance speah or th e ki nd or CO!\ lllO log ical argument that "i !\ not a rational ~ tru c t u r c th at ca n be trea ted a ~ co mplete and con sbtcnl in it se lf. bu t only as co nsi!\tc nt wi thin the empiri ca l conditio n!\ of' our actua l knowledge or God and of the creatio n. " 1 11' "The llounc" of Christian T heology." /l /:T. pp. 42-5 1. "'' "The T1ansfo rmation of Natural T heology." GCi7 ~ pp. 94 . 10(1-107. "" !hid.. p. 107. 11 '" /hid. ll•'J /hid. "" !hid.. p. 108. 171 /hid.

11 2 /hid.; d . "Incarnation and Space and Time." ST!. p. 66.

111 "The Transformation of Natural T heology." GG"/ ; p. 108.

j7.\ /hid.

1 7 ~ /hid m. /hid.

177 /hid. "' !hid, pp. 108- 109. Jl'I !hid. p. 109. """Theological Rea li sm," PFCT p. 184: cf'. " Prefa ce," /?E'l; p. 11. 1" "The Transfo rmation of Natural T heology." GGT p. IOI.

JX I /hie/. , p. 104.

JX\ !hie!., p. 108. 1" "Creatio n and Science," CiGT p. 52.

I X~ /hie/. 1xi. "Theological Science," GG7; p. 145. Torrance's Special Service to Christian Theology 1 On Thomas F. Torrance's wo rks in progress sec Comempurary Awhurs, New Revision Series, Vol. 5, pp. 53 1-532. 2 7heolo}!.y mu/ the G'o.\pe/ qf Christ: An F.s.my in Reorientmion. p. 46. 1 " Preface," TS. p. ix. 4 "Truth and Justificatio n in Doctrinal Formulation." R C/ ~ p. 149: sec also ihid. p. 167. n. 13. where Torrance stales th at "freedom and object ive order go together." ' " Preface," TS. p. xviii : ''The Interacti on of T heology with Scientific Deve lopment," TS, p. 55; "The Epistemologi­ cal Releva nce of the Ho ly S pirit ," Ci R. pp. 171. 181: and "The Word of God and the Respo nse of Man," G /?, pp. 137-164. especia ll y pp. 152- 153. '' "The Knowledge of God," 7S, p. 34. 1 "The Eclipse of God," GR. p. 34: cf. "The Nature of Scient ific Acti vit y," 7S. p. 125: and "Problems of Logic," TS. pp. 228-229. ' "The Ec lipse of God," GR. p. 35.

'I ff>id 1" "Theological Rationalit y," GR, pp. 8-9: "The Nalllrc of Scientific Acti vit y," TS. pp. 124- 125: "Problems of Logic," 7 ~'i. pp. 228-229: "Word and Num be r," CTSC. p. 11 6. 11 "The Nat ure of Scientific Acti vit y," TS. p. 124. ""Theological Rationa li ty," GR. p. 9.

1.1 "The Nat ure of Scientific Activity," TS. p. 125. 42 1•1 Sec K arl Banh. " Liberal T heology- A n Interview ... Final Tes 1i11 w 11 ic•.\'. ed. Eberh ard Bu sc h and trans. Geoffrey W . B ro mil c~' (G rand Rapids. Michi gan: Wm . 13 . Ec rdmans Publishing Co .. 1977). pp . .1 1-40. especial ly pp . 34-.17 . o n p. 34. Banh says: "For freedom is al ways a res ponsible th ing." and on p. .17 . he stat es that "I do not beco me a slave but free when I hear the reve lati on of th is free God": and in C hapter XV I. ".J es us Christ. the T ru e \Vitncss." of hi s Church Dogmaticv. I V.3. 1. ed. Geoffrey W. Bromi ley and Tho mas F. Torrance. and tra ns. G. W. Bro mi lcy (Ed inburg h: T. & T. Clark. 196 1). p. 447. where he is disc uss ing "The Fal se hood of Man." Barth states that "it is a matlcr of th e freedom to elect Him as elec ted by Him. It is a matter of the freedom or res ponsibility to Him." With regard to Barth 's understand in g of theological freedom and free theology see also Ro bert J . Palma. Karl /Jar1'1:1· Theuluxr o{ Cul1 11 rl': 711 e Frl'edom o{ C11/1 11 re {o r 1/ie Praist' u/' Gud (A ll ison Park . Penn sv lvania: Pickwick Publicat.io n.s. 198.1). especia ll y Chapter. JV. entitl ed " Barth's Paradigms of Free C ulture." pp. JJ -69: wi th regard to evangelica l o r free theology. freedom of theology. and theology of freedom see in particular pp . .16-.17. 40-4 1. 66-69. "Sec "Christianity in Scientific Culture." CTSC. pp. 1.1 - 14. where Torrance states that "if theol ogy is not to be swa mped by cultural relativism but is to retain it s integrit y. it must put all cultural ass umptions rigo rou sly to th e test be fore the compelling claims of its own proper subjcc t- matler and it s objective evid ential grounds."

11' J acques de Senarclc ns. "Theology in Reconstructi on. " IJ11//e1 i11 of the Department of theology of the World Pres­ byteri an Alliance+ the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. Vo l. 6. No. 4 (Summer. 1966). p. 2: this is an article rev iew of T orrance's Theology in Rec ·011s1rw·1io11. 17 "The Na ture of Theology." SF. p. I. "Sec "The Lo rd of Space and Time." S T/?, p. 168. where·Torrance speaks of the temptatio n of im posin g "some artificial framework in order to restore co herence." 19 Sec "Problems of L og ic," TS, p. 2 14. wh ere T orran ce says that "becau se H e does not ce ase to be Grace in our kn owing of Him. all our th ought s and th eir interrelations must renect th e move ment of G race." "' "The Theology of Light ... CTSC. p. 80. " "Ecumenis m and Science." G R. p. 132. 22 /hid

2·1 /hid. : it should be noted that T orrance made this statement in 1968. 24 /hid " /hid. pp. 132- 133. 21• T homas F. T orrance, "Some Reformed Churchmen speak their Minds: Letters to the Editor on Catholicity. " /Ju//etin of the Department of Theology of the World Pres byterian Alliance + the Wo rld Alliance of Reformed Churches. Vol. 2, No. I (S ummer. 1961 ). p. 5: the other contributo rs we re J acques de Senarclens: Glyn more J ohn: Elwy n S mith: Wilhelm Niese!: J ohn Macquarrie: Roland H. Baint on: and Markus Barth. " Claude Welch, "Theology." Religion. p. 240. 28 /hid.

2" Sec Thomas F. T orrance, " Preface, " ST/, p. ix, where he states: "I am no less critical of my own Reformed tradition in it s development in ce rt ain other directions." ·"Torrance deals with this conce ptio n of Polanyi in the fo ll owing places: ")ncarn ati on and S pace and T ime," S T!. pp. 84-85: "The Lord of S pace and T ime," S TR, p. 188: "Christianity in Scientific Change." CTSC. p. 16: "The Priorit y of Belief, .. CTSC, p. 72: Determinism and Creati on. /J CO. p. 20: "Contingencc and Disorder, .. DCO. p. 102. 31 With regard to Torrance's in debtedness to such fi eld theories and their relati o nal ways of thinking sec the foll ow­ ing: " Man, the Priest of Creati on," GG T. pp. 7-8: "Theological Science, " GGT. pp. 11 2- 113: "The Lo rd of Space and Time," S TR, pp. 185- 186: "Christianity in Scientific Change, " CTSC. p. 22: "The Prio rit y of Belief," CTSC. pp. 49-72, especially pp. 49-53: "Theologi cal Rationalit y," GR, pp. 13- 15: and "Theological Realism." PFC 1 ~ pp. 182- 183. 32 Sec "Ecumeni sm and Science, GR. pp. 11 2- 134, especially pp. 13 1- 134. JJ Sec " Preface, " TS, p. xvii , where T orrance opts for dial ogue, but not betwee n "science and religion, " but rather betwee n "science and 1/ieo /0101." 34 "Creation and Science," GG 7 ~ p. 73; "Theological Science," GGT. pp. 11 0, 145. ""Man, the Priest of Creatio n," GGJ: pp. 7-8: 'Theological Science," GG T. p. 145: "The Basic Grammar of T heology.'' GG 7: p. 162. "'"The Interacti o n of Theology with Scientific Development ," TS. pp. 102, 111 . 37 "Theological Science," GGT. p. 145. ""Theologica l Science amo ng the Special Sciences," TS, pp. 28 1-352; "T heology in the Scientific Wo rld .'' GR, pp. 89- 11 1, see especia ll y pp. 95-99, a secti on entitled "The Difference between Theological Science and the Other Sciences."

3'1 "Theological Science amo ng the Special Sciences," TS. pp. 28 1-352: "Theology in the Scientific Wo rld ," GR, pp. 95-99.

43 ''°"Theo logical Scie nce am ong the Spec ia l Sc i e nce~." 7 :~.. p. 285.

·II /hid ; ~cc abo " Preface." "/ :~- . pp. xvii-xviii: and "Cllrbtianity in Scientific Change. " c 1:s·c. pp. 27-J I. where Torrance di ~c u ~~c:-i "LI mo re nex ihl c and ye t ii more faithful wa y of kn owi ng app ropriate to what we seek to know" as one or th e bcnelit s which C h ri ~ ti an th eology is offered by rece nt change in science. ·U Torrance di sc u ~ses such beliefs in "U lti ma te Belie fs and the Scicnt ilic Revoluti on." Cro.\.\ C11rr<•111 s. pp. 129-149: sec al so "The Priorit y of Belief." CTSC. pp . 41-72. es pecially pp. 56-72. 41 "Theologica l Science." GG7: pp. 132- 134: "U lti mate Beliefs and the Scienti fic Revoluti on." Cross C11rren1s. p. 145. •·•"Theological Scie nce," GGT pp. 11 0- 11 1. " /hid. p. 11 I. "''"The l'riorit y of Beli ef. " C7SC. pp. 62-72: "The Interaction of Theology wi th Scientific Deve lo pment ," 'TS. p. 93. ""Theological Rati onality," GI/, pp. 13- 15. ""Creati o n and Science," GG7: pp. 44, 73: "Theo logical Science." GG7 ~ pp. 110, 145.

·1'' "The Transformation of atural Theology," GGT, pp. 100-106. " /hid, p. 104. " "Christianity in Scientific Change," C7SC. p. 31. " "The Theology of Li ght." CTSC. p. 75. " /hid.. p. 77. " /hid., pp. 78- 107. ll /hid. p. 78. ll· "Prcf'acc," ST!. p. v. 57 Thomas F. Torrance, "The Problem of Spatial Conce pt s in Nicene Theology," ST/, p. 2; sec also "In carna ti on and Space and Time," STJ. pp. 56-57, 62-63. " "The Problem of Spatial Concepts in Nice ne T heology," ST/, p. 4; sec also " Incarnation and S pace and Time." ST!. pp. 56, 58. 5'1 "The Problem of Spatial Concepts in Nice ne Theology," S7J. p. 18. "'!hid.: on usin g concepts different ia ll y sec also ihid., p. 16: Thomas F. Torrance, "The Problem of Spatial Conce pts in Reformation and Modern Theology, " ST/. pp. 24-25: and "Incarn ati on and Space and Time." S T/, p. 86.

''1 "Incarnation and Space and Time," ST/, p. 58. '" /hid., p. 56. " /hid.. p. 59. '" /hid., p. 60: cf. "The Problem of Spatial Concepts in Nicene Theology, ST/, p. 11. <•5 "Incarnation and Space and Ti me," S"l'f. p. 69. "' /hid.. p. 71. ,,, /hid.. p. 81. ,,, /hid. (\'} /hid '" /hid., p. 86. " /hid. n " Preface," S TR, p. xi. " /hid., p. xii . 74 Sec T homas F. Torrance, Chapter 5 entitled "The Ascension of Christ," Chapter 6 entitled 'The Nature of the Ascension Event," and Chapter 7 entitled "The Ascension and the Paro11sia of Christ," STR, pp. 106, 123, 143. " "The Lord of Space and Time." STR, p. 175. ,,, /hid., p. 190.

77 /hid., p. 175. " "Introduction," S TR, p. 22: sec also ihid., p. 23: and "The Lord of Space and Time," S TR, pp. 185, 189- 190.

7'1 "Int roduction," STR, p. 23: "The Lord of Space and T ime," STR, pp. 180, 190. "'"Int roduction," STR, p. 22. " "The Lord of Space and Time," STR. p. 190. " /hid., p. 184. KJ /hid. " /hid. " /hid, p. 186.

44 "' /hid. p. 188. " /hid. p. 19 1. " .. Theologica l Rational ity." G II. p. 6. '" .. Chris tia nity in Scient ific Cha nge." CTSC. p. 14 . • , //Jid .. pp. 14- 15.

'II //J id.. p. 15. "'"Theological Eclu ca ti on Today ... Ti?. pp. 25-27. es pecia ll y p. 26. 9J /hid .. p. 26 . .. /hid ''' Thomas F. Torrance. "The Church in the New Era o f' Scientific and Cosmological Change ... Tll E. p. 27 1: see also ihid .. pp. 272-273. ""Thomas F. Torrance,"') am full of hope' ... says the Moderator of the Church of Scotland," Th e C/111rch Herald, Nove mber 12. 1976. p. 10. This art icle was reprinted wi th permission fr om Chris1ia11i1_1· Todm'. copyri ght 1976.

'17 ..Th e Ec lipse of God. " G I?. p. 50: cf. .. /\ New Reformation''." TR. pp. 260. 27 1. "'"The Ec li pse of God," G I?. p. 50. "" "Ec ume ni sm and Scie nce." G /?, p. 130.

1011 /hid.

111 1 /hid. : see also .. The Nature o f' Truth," 7S. p. 187. whe re Torrance terms a fa lse way the tendency lo id entify "the T ruth of God with this-worldly truth": also ihid. p. 188. where he sin gles out the fa lse way of the mysti c wh o see ks "a truth in sheer detachm ent from all th at is lin itc- spaccless. tim eless. ecs tati c truth "; see al so Thomus F. Tor­ rance. "Theologica l and Scientific World-Views." DCO. p. 64. where he faults th e "rather one-sid ed emphas is on history" fo und in "much modern theology.'' th at is. "while it recog ni zes th at faith in God cann ot be cut loose from temporal factors. it has neve rtheless sou ght to cut off fait h from it s in vo lve ment with spatial factors." 1112 " /\ Realist Int erpretation of God's Se lf-Revelation." R E7; p. 84: see also "The Bound s of Christian T heology." R ET: pp. 27. 30: "Creati on and Science." GG T. p. 45: and .. The Transfor mation of Natural Theology." GGT: p. 75. w.1 Sec "The Interacti on of Theo logy with Scientifi c Development ," TS. pp. 75-85, where Torrance di sc usses scientific obj ec tivity and the great contribution the Refor mation made to it : sec also "T he Nature of Scientific Activity." TS . pp. 131- 140: Torrance deals repeatedl y with obj ec ti vit y throughout hi s Theological Scien ce. "" "The Natu re of Scienti fi c Acti vit y," TS. p. 13 1. "" /hid.. pp. 135- 136. 1111• Sec ihid.. p. 136, where Torrance stales that "th e Object of theological kn owledge has a twofold objec ti vity, a primary o bjec ti vit y whi ch is God's givin g of Himself the Lord , a seco ndary o bjecti vit y in which He gives Himse ll' to us in human fo rm within our space and time"; in ibid. , n. I, he says that "this distincti on betwee n God's primary and secondary obj ecti vity is Barth's, O wrch Dogmalits, II. I, p. 16f." 111 1 "Theological Science," GG7: p. 145.

111' "The Nature of Scientific Acti vit y," TS, p. 124. l!N f/J id. "" /hid.. p. 11 3.

Ill /hid

11 2 " Problems of Logic, 7S. p. 242.

11.• "The Epistemological Relevance of th e Holy Spirit." G R. p. 190.

11 4 "Theological Education Today," TR, p. 29. Ill /hid

" ''"The Church in th e New Era of Scientific and Cosmological Change," TRI:.~ p. 271: cf. "T he Bounds of Christian Theology." RE7: p. 47: "The Basic Grammar of Theology," GGT. p. 178. 111 "Christian it y in Scientific Change," CTSC, pp. 14-15.

11' "The Church in the New Era of Scientific and Cosmological Change," TR E. p. 272. 11•1 "The Basic Grammar of Theology," GGT. p. 178.

45 Torrance's Theological Position A Reformed Theology ...... Theological Purposes ...... Types of Theology ......

Touchstones of Torrance's Theological Method Theological Ultimates as Touchstones ...... Levels of Truth, Authority, and Knowledge ...... The Empirical-Theoretical Method of Scientific Theology ......

Cardinal Facets of Torrance's Theology A Trinitarian Theology ...... A Christocentric Theology ...... A Unitary Theology ...... A Realist Theology ...... A Rational Theology ...... A Natural Theology ......

Torrance's Special Service to Christian Theology Theological Discipline through Obedient Questioning ...... Theological Integrity through Real Integration ...... Theological Advance through Scientific Understanding ...... Theological Relevance through Real Relations ...... The Life and Work of Professor Thomas F. Torrance ...... A Pilgrimage in the School of Christ- An Interview With Thomas F. Torrance

46