Disputatio IV: De Veritate Theologiae Duplex

On the Twofold Truth of Theology

Quaeritur

Utrum veritas theologiae duplicem habeat formam: internam, quae consistit in felicitate Spiritu data intra linguam fidei T, et externam, quae consistit in adaequatione huius linguae ad esse divinitus constitutum; et utrum hae duae veritates, distinctae sed ordinatae, in Christo, qui est simul Verbum et Res, suam unitatem reperiant.

Whether the truth of theology possesses a twofold form: an internal truth, consisting in Spirit-given felicity within the language of faith T, and an external truth, consisting in the adequation of that language to the reality constituted by God; and whether these two forms of truth, distinct yet ordered, find their unity in Christ, who is both Word and Reality.

Thesis

Theology possesses both an internal and an external truth.

• Internal truth (veritas interna) refers to the coherence and felicity of theological speech as governed by the Spirit within the community of faith.

• External truth (veritas externa) pertains to the correspondence or adequacy of that speech when interpreted within being, its fulfillment in the order of reality that God creates and sustains.
  Together they form a single movement from faith’s language to God’s reality and back again.

Locus Classicus

Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή· οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα εἰ μὴ δι’ ἐμοῦ.

— Ἰωάννης 14:6

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me.” — John 14:6

In this saying, Christ names Himself not as one who possesses truth but as Truth itself. The ego eimi identifies the divine speaker with the structure of intelligibility itself: the way (ὁδός) that orders, the truth (ἀλήθεια) that discloses, and the life (ζωή) that enacts. The Word thus contains in Himself the threefold form of logic—ordo, veritas, actus. Every theological proposition, insofar as it participates in Him, carries this trinitarian imprint: it orders, reveals, and vivifies.

“Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐλάβον παρὰ Κυρίου ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν.”

— 1 Κορινθίους 11:23

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you.” — 1 Corinthians 11:23

Paul here reveals the divine pattern of transmission: the word of faith is not self-generated but received and handed on. Theological language thus possesses a forma tradita—a logical form not invented by reason but bestowed in revelation. The structure of saying corresponds to the structure of giving: every verbum fidei is a participation in the Logos who both speaks and gives Himself.

Λόγος ἐστιν ἐνδιάθετος καὶ προφορικός· ὁ μὲν ἐνδιάθετος ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ, ὁ δὲ προφορικός ἐν φωνῇ.

— Κλήμης Ἀλεξανδρεύς, Στρωματεῖς V.14

“The Word exists both inwardly and outwardly: the inward Word in the soul, the uttered Word in speech.” — Clement of Alexandria, Stromata V.14

Clement distinguishes between the logos endiathetos (the word conceived) and the logos prophorikos (the word spoken), a distinction later adopted into Trinitarian theology. The Logos of God, eternally endiathetos in the Father, becomes prophorikos in creation and incarnation. The structure of human discourse mirrors this divine procession: thought proceeds to word, interior reason to exterior form, without ceasing to be one. Logic, therefore, is not alien to theology but the vestige of divine procession within language.

“Forma sermonis, sicut et forma rerum, a Verbo Dei derivatur.”

— Augustinus, De Trinitate XV.11

“The form of speech, like the form of things, is derived from the Word of God.” — Augustine, On the TrinityXV.11

For Augustine, both linguistic and ontological form flow from the same source—the divine Word through whom all things are shaped. Grammar and creation share a common archetype. The ordo signorum (order of signs) reflects the ordo rerum(order of things), because both proceed from the ordo Verbi. Hence, the logical form of a true theological statement is not a human imposition upon revelation but a participation in the rationality that created it.

“Et sicut per artem fit opus artificis, ita per Verbum Dei fit omnis creatura.”

— Thomas Aquinas, Super Ioannem 1.1

“And just as by his art the craftsman produces his work, so by the Word of God every creature comes to be.”— Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on John 1.1

Aquinas here extends the analogy of form to divine action: as art gives form to matter, so the divine Word gives form to being. The logical structure of theology—its subject, predicate, and copula—thus mirrors the metaphysical structure of creation—ens, forma, actus. To speak rightly of God is to let the form of divine wisdom shape the syntax of human thought.

In these testimonies—Christ, Paul, Clement, Augustine, and Aquinas—the same mystery unfolds: forma logica arises from forma Verbi. The Word who is Truth orders both thought and being; He is at once the principle of intelligibility and the content of revelation. Theological language, therefore, is not a human system of representation but a sacramental participation in divine rationality.

Every true theological proposition is an echo of that eternal utterance by which God speaks Himself and all things into being. Its logical form—subject ordered to predicate through the copula—repeats, in miniature, the procession of Son from Father and the return of all things through the Spirit. To speak with logical clarity in theology is thus to enter the rhythm of Trinitarian speech itself: the Logos giving Himself form in human words.

Explicatio

In previous disputations, theology was described as a formal language T, authorized by the Spirit, and interpreted within models that link language to being. Here we consider what it means to say that such theological expressions are true.

In logic, truth is often defined by correspondence: a sentence is true when what it says obtains in the world. In theology, that notion must be qualified. Theology’s words do not first describe and then verify; they participate in divine speech.

To express this participation, we distinguish between two levels of truth:

1. Internal truth (veritas interna) occurs within the system of theological language itself. We might say that a tatement is internally true when it is felicitous, when it coheres with Scripture, doctrine, and Spirit-guided discourse. For instance, “Christ is Lord” is internally true because it is consonant with the grammar of faith T as the Spirit has given it.

   Symbolically, we may call the internal measure of this truth FT, the felicity conditions of T. These conditions ensure that theology speaks rightly, even before modeling connects it to being.

2. External truth (veritas externa) arises when the same expression is interpreted within a model of reality M, yielding what we earlier called TC, or truth conditions. These are the states of affairs, the real relations, events, or properties through which God’s Word is fulfilled in the world.

   In simple terms: FT + Modeling = TC. That is, when Spirit-given felicity joins ontological adequacy, the statement is true in both faith and fact.

This distinction does not divide truth into two different kinds but shows its two dimensions. Internal truth without external fulfillment is mere coherence; external truth without inner authorization is unfettered speculation. Only when the Spirit unites both does theology achieve full truth.

Objectiones

Obiectio I. Thomas Aquinas maintains that truth is the adequation of intellect and thing (adaequatio intellectus et rei). Theology, insofar as it concerns divine things, must therefore have a single, objective truth grounded in God’s being. To posit a “double truth” in theology would divide divine reality from its cognition and collapse truth into mere human interpretation.

Obiectio II. Late medieval nominalism holds that theological statements possess truth only insofar as they express the divine will revealed in Scripture. There is no ontological correspondence beyond God’s voluntary decree. To speak of an “ontological truth” in addition to a “formal” or linguistic one is to reintroduce metaphysical realism against the simplicity of God’s sovereignty.

Obiectio III. For Kant, all human knowledge is conditioned by the forms of intuition and categories of the understanding. “Theology” may express moral faith but cannot claim objective correspondence to the divine. Any “double truth” distinguishing linguistic coherence from ontological reality confuses the distinction between phenomena and noumena. The only truth theology can have is practical, not ontological.

Obiectio IV. George Lindbeck and others argue that theological truth resides within the coherence of a community’s grammar. There is no “ontological truth” to be accessed beyond the language of faith. To posit a second, deeper truth is to reintroduce the very representationalism Lindbeck rejects. Theological truth is singular and intralinguistic; there is no duplex veritas.

Obiectio V. From a constructivist or deconstructive standpoint, all claims to “truth” are historically contingent linguistic performances. A “double truth” merely multiplies illusions. Theology’s so-called ontological truth is only a higher-order fiction meant to stabilize its discourse. Truth is produced, not revealed.

Responsiones

Ad I. Thomistic realism correctly grounds truth in the relation between intellect and being, yet theology’s intellect is not autonomous but pneumatic. Its formal truth, the coherence and intelligibility of theological language, is secured within the human domain. Its ontological truth, the correspondence of that language to divine reality, is effected by the Holy Spirit, who bridges word and being. These two aspects are not contradictory but correlative; the Spirit makes the formal act of saying coincide with the divine act of being.

Ad II. Nominalism preserves God’s freedom but severs divine willing from ontological intelligibility. The “double truth” of theology does not undermine divine sovereignty; it clarifies its modes of manifestation. God’s will becomes present formally in the human act of confession and ontologically in the reality the confession names. The Spirit unites both, ensuring that what is truly said in faith corresponds to how God truly is, and without collapsing divine causality into human speech.

Ad III. While Kant’s distinction between phenomena and noumena limits knowledge to the conditions of human sensibility, theological truth concerns divine communication. The Spirit renders finite intellects proportionate to divine truth without violating their transcendental structure. The duplex truth of theology honors both sides: the formal truth proper to human language and the ontological truth granted by divine participation. Revelation transforms the limits of reason into avenues of communion.

Ad IV. Post-liberal theology rightly emphasizes the communal and grammatical dimensions of faith, but its refusal of ontological reference renders theology self-enclosed. The double truth affirms that grammar and reality are distinct yet related: theological statements are formally true as expressions within a rule-governed practice, and ontologically true insofar as that practice participates in divine being through the Spirit. The grammar of faith is sacramental; it mediates what it signifies.

Ad V. Constructivism dissolves truth into performance, yet it inadvertently testifies to a real difference between the act of speaking and what the act seeks to convey. The duplex truth acknowledges that difference while grounding it in divine causality. The Spirit authorizes human constructions as instruments of revelation, preserving their historical finitude while ensuring participation in the eternal. Theological truth is neither illusion nor production but participation in a Word that precedes every word.

Nota

Picture the unity of these two truths as a circle rather than a line. Theological language begins with T, the grammar given by the Spirit. Within T, internal truth arises through faithful speech. This language is then modeled into reality M, producing external truth as divine being answers divine word. The resulting adequacy returns again to renew T, forming a continual exchange between language and being, grace and truth.

When theologians write FT + Modeling = TC, they are not composing an equation but naming a semantic reality: felicity (Spirit-authorized speech) joined to modeling (Spirit-interpreted being) yields theological truth. It is a symbolic shorthand for Luther’s claim that God’s Word is true because it does what it says.

Christ Himself is this coincidence of internal and external truth, the Word that is also the world’s fulfillment. To confess that “the Word became flesh” is to say that God’s internal Word (eternally spoken) has become externally real in history.

Determinatio

From the foregoing it is determined that:

1. Theology possesses both an internal truth (felicity within the Spirit-governed language of faith) and an external truth (adequacy to divine reality).

2. These two are ordered, not opposed: internal truth grounds theology’s faithfulness, external truth secures its realism.

3. Christ, as both Word and Reality, is the unity of these two modes of truth.

4. The Spirit mediates their conjunction, ensuring that the truth of faith is neither abstract nor speculative but living and enacted.

5. Hence, theology’s veracity is neither purely linguistic nor purely ontological; it is incarnational, the meeting of speech and being in the Spirit of Christ.

Transitus ad Disputationem V: De Relatione inter Veritatem et Felicitatem Theologicam

Having discerned that theological truth is twofold—internal in the felicity of the Spirit, external in the adequation of language to divine reality—it now becomes necessary to examine the relation between these two modes. For if theology is true both in actu Spiritus and in ratione verbi, then truth and blessedness cannot be opposed, but must interpenetrate within the life of faith.

The danger of division is constant: a theology concerned only with external correspondence lapses into formalism, while one absorbed in internal felicity risks dissolving truth into experience. Yet their separation betrays the nature of both, for truth without joy is barren, and joy without truth is vain. Theologia therefore finds its wholeness only where the intellect’s assent and the soul’s delight converge, where the knowledge of God becomes the joy of God known.

Hence we proceed to Disputationem V: De Relatione inter Veritatem et Felicitatem Theologicam, wherein it will be asked how truth and felicity are related as form and act within theology; whether felicity is the perfection of truth or its manifestation; and how, in the life of the believer, the Spirit unites the veracity of the Word with the beatitude of participation.