Lane Tipton: "The Deeper Protestant Conception of Natural Theology"

T

Taylor

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Dr. Lane Tipton, Fellow of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Reformed Forum, has just released a new article through the Reformed Forum newsletter. In it, he challenges Dr. John Fesko's introductory essay to Geerhardus Vos' Natural Theology, which Reformation Heritage recently released. Dr. Tipton speaks to his purpose in writing the piece:

Reading Vos' Natural Theology in light of Reformed Dogmatics illumines his critique of the traditional Thomistic nature-grace anthropology and the semi-Pelagianism that flows from it. Vos' work from Reformed Dogmatics finds explicit and sweeping application in Natural Theology. Allowing the two works to interpret one another shines the spotlight from Reformed Dogmatics onto Vos' recurring claim in Natural Theology that the Reformed explicitly rejected traditional Roman Catholic natural theology and forged in its place a distinctively Reformed alternative.​
​
John Fesko fails to understand this central point in his "Introduction" to Vos' Natural Theology, asserting that "Vos and Aquinas might seem like an ill-matched pair, but the two actually do belong together" in their approaches to natural theology. Put a bit differently, Fesko thinks that Aquinas expresses a natural theology that is congenial to Vos' in the quest for the "retrieval of a Reformed natural theology." While many might view Aquinas and Vos as "oil and water," Fesko argues that such is not the case. According to Fesko, Thomas Aquinas, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and Vos fit coherently within "general patterns of patristic, medieval, and Reformation expressions, that is, in terms of God's two books, nature and Scripture." Fesko makes these claims about Aquinas and Vos, even though Vos nowhere cites Aquinas in Natural Theology. Nonetheless, Vos does offer a sweeping and penetrating critique of the medieval Roman Catholic nature-grace model of explicit Thomistic provenance.​
​
In what follows I will propose a reading of Vos' Natural Theology in light of his Reformed Dogmatics that will challenge Fesko's interpretations of Vos and Aquinas and will enable a comprehensive engagement with and critique of traditional Roman Catholic natural theology.​

It is a somewhat lengthy essay, but I believe it is essential in the ongoing discussion surrounding "The Great Tradition," natural theology, Aquinas, Vos, and Van Til. To read the full article, subscribe to the Reformed Forum newsletter, and they will send you a link to download a PDF copy of their 2022 issue.
 
I take a mediating approach. Vos rejected the donum superadditum. No one denies that. On the other hand, Vos was far more appreciative of natural theology than most presups today.

To make matters worse, Vos's exegesis in Reformed Dogmatics does not always match his later exegesis. That further complicates the "what Vos said" angle.

My issue with Tipton is that he makes his critique of the donum the central article of medieval natural theology, and that's simply not the case. I agree with his critique of the donum. I just don't think it is as important as he makes it out to be.
 
Why mediating? What fault do you find with the Thomistic view?(with respect to natural theology)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top