Theology and the Trivium: An Analogy
Most people who study or serve in classical Christian education (CCE) are familiar with the pedagogy of the Trivium, often represented as three stages of learning: grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Many of us also have a background in theological education at a seminary. Sometimes, however, those who discover CCE while pursuing theological studies find themselves wading in unfamiliar waters since many seminaries employ modern pedagogical frameworks. [1] I am one such person, currently pursuing a PhD in Biblical Theology while occasionally substitute teaching at a classical school. Having swum deeply in the waters of theological studies, and having dipped my toes into CCE, I noticed some similarities between the study of theology and the pedagogy of the Trivium. This article sets forth an analogy between these two realms, aiming to explain the basics of classical pedagogy for theologians who desire future involvement in CCE.
Before proceeding, let me provide a brief conceptual overview. In CCE, grammar involves classification or the language of a discipline. [2] Every subject—whether arithmetic, astronomy, or science—has its own “vernacular” tied to it. [3] In the grammar stage, classical educators seek to familiarize students with the “vernacular” of various subjects, often through the disciplines of memorization and recitation. In the second stage of CCE, logic takes precedence. Students must take the “vernacular” they learned during the grammar stage and craft coherent propositions about reality. Logic students also begin evaluating the consistency of others’ arguments. Through logic, one comes to understand how the various aspects of God’s reality relate to one another. Finally, rhetoric aims at communicating complex ideas via extended argument. Rhetoric students learn to express the truth with consistency and persuasiveness. They also learn to expound, critique, and elaborate on arguments made by others.
Classical educators employ this three-part pedagogical movement as a means of producing students who use their knowledge well, understand the art of learning, and think creatively about complex aspects of God’s world.
Some theologians have described theological reasoning as a movement from exegesis to biblical theology (BT) to systematic theology (ST). [4] For readers with a background in theological studies, this 3-part progression will be more or less familiar depending on the particulars of their seminary experience. First, exegesis is performed on a certain text so that its interpretation can be discovered. Exegesis therefore seems to act as a sort of classification or as the “grammar” of theology. Second, the discipline of BT considers the movement of the whole biblical storyline (not simply “theology that is biblical”). In other words, BT seeks a logical understanding of how Scripture’s storyline progresses. Thirdly and finally, having exegeted individual passages of Scripture and having grasped the contours of the overarching biblical narrative, one may formulate a coherent system of thought concerning the Christian faith through ST. One author’s definition suggests the goal of ST is “to systematize the facts of the Bible and ascertain the principles or general truths which those facts involve.” [5] We might say, therefore, that ST considers all that the Bible has to say about God and asks what must be true in light of what the Bible says.
The remainder of this article will elaborate on this analogy, exploring the similarities between the pedagogy of the Trivium and the study of theology.
Exegesis, the Grammar of Theology
Exegesis provides the “building blocks” of theology. Exegesis is the critical examination of a text, its language, and its background. It considers the grammar and syntax of Scripture’s original languages and how such factors influence a text’s meaning. Linguistic factors often yield insights into how a passage of Scripture should be classified in terms of genre. Law, poetry, narrative, apocalyptic writing, and the epistles are all different styles of writing found in the Bible. In short, theologians must pay careful attention to any given text’s basic features in order to arrive at an accurate interpretation.
Similar to the role of exegesis in theology is the role of grammar in classical education. Grammar focuses on the “building blocks” of thought within a subject. In order for students to become mature and creative thinkers, they must first understand the language we use to describe the world. Grammar contributes to this end through the study of names, definitions, and classifications. Every field of study has its own system of language. In biology, we can speak of “human beings,” but we can further classify the various parts of human beings by naming anatomical structures like the heart, lungs, brain, hands, and fingers. In arithmetic, we introduce students to numbers (the alphabet of mathematics) and explain the difference between addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Grammar is interested in parsing out the basic definitions and terminology behind a given body of knowledge.
In theology, exegesis describes the features of a Scripture passage through critical examination. In CCE, grammar examines the basic terms and definitions within various subjects. Exegesis aims to accurately examine and interpret a passage of Scripture, and grammar aims to accurately describe the world through language. Exegesis acts as the language of theology, and grammar acts as the language of various disciplines.
Biblical Theology, the Logic of Theology
We may proceed from the grammar/exegesis analogy to consider the similarities between BT and logic. The definitions of BT are numerous, and the discipline attracts great interest in the modern theological academy. Loosely defined, it is “the study of the whole Bible on its own terms.” [6] DeRouchie, Martin, and Naselli put it more succinctly: “BT studies how the whole Bible progresses, integrates, and climaxes in Christ.” [7] Perhaps the most pertinent aspect I have noticed in my studies, however, is BT’s focus on the movement of the Scriptural storyline. BT studies how the various passages of the Scriptures fit together to form a coherent understanding of God’s redemptive work in the world.
Similarly, logic teaches how we may use language to coherently describe reality. We could say logic is concerned with the movement of grammar. Having mastered basic terms and categories, students fit the pieces of grammar together to form cogent thoughts. Logic is the art of discursive reasoning according to the laws of logic. In other words, it is “the art of arguing correctly.” [8] Regrettably, many of us made it through school having never learned the three formal laws of logic: (1) the law of identity, (2) the law of noncontradiction, and (3) the law of the excluded middle. Logic teaches us how to conform our thinking to these rules, as well as methods for building and critiquing various kinds of arguments.
BT and logic are similar in that each aim at properly organizing exegesis or grammar to form coherent ideas. BT takes exegetical content and displays the movement of the biblical storyline, and logic takes the grammar of a subject and crafts a cogent argument. BT examines how the pieces of the Bible fit together; logic examines how facts about a subject fit together. These two realms of study are both concerned with the proper order of things or the “logical” order that allows for the most cohesion. In this way, BT resembles the second stage in the Trivium.
Systematic Theology, the Rhetoric of Theology
Finally, ST resembles the rhetoric stage of the Trivium. ST surveys all the data from Scripture on particular topics, such as angels or soteriology. It inquires as to what must be true about a topic based on everything the Bible says about it. [9] It is therefore an imaginative task of contributing to the field of theology through creative reasoning. ST likewise considers what must be true about our world if we accept that the Bible presents an accurate picture of reality. [10] The discipline investigates the deepest questions about our world and pursues answers informed by the Scriptures.
ST must sometimes probe beyond the biblical text and into the realm of philosophy. It contributes to arguments set forth in Scripture through reasoning, either presenting old ideas in a new way or suggesting new ideas that build upon previous scholarship. [11] ST seeks to communicate what is true in light of what the Bible says. ST is, in one sense, the final stage in the process of theological reasoning.
As ST is the final stage of theological reasoning, so too rhetoric is the final stage of the Trivium. Rhetoric sets forth propositions through elegant and robust argumentation. To succeed in rhetoric, students must first study grammar and logic for a significant amount of time. [12] Central to rhetoric is the art of persuasion and demonstration. It aims to communicate how multiple logical propositions fit together. In rhetoric, students present material, often in the form of a thesis, to an audience. The audience will in turn scrutinize the speakers’ arguments. If an argument is cogent, persuasive, and clearly communicated, it should be received by the intellectual community. [13] Powerful rhetorical presentations are only possible when students achieve mastery of propositional knowledge concerning a subject. In other words, students must accumulate all the information they can on a topic and speak about an old truth in a new way—or set forth a new idea in light of all they have learned.
Just as ST is the accumulation of biblical data on a subject and the creative communication of what must be true in light of the data, so too rhetoric entails the accumulation of information and the presentation of that information. ST considers propositions and topics from as many angles as possible, articulating what must be the case about God’s world if the Scriptures are true. Rhetoric seeks to creatively present old ideas about a topic in a new way or contribute to a field of study through a fresh proposition. Both disciplines are concerned with the presentation of a thorough, robust, and cohesive understanding of the truth. ST is the final stage of theological reasoning and rhetoric is the final stage of the Trivium.
Conclusion
Obviously, there are some weaknesses in this analogy. Exegetical, biblical, and systematic theologians do not always agree on definitions and methodology. Another imperfection relates to the concern theologians and CCE teachers have for the integration of subjects. The approaches to theology and the stages of the Trivium are meant to be practiced throughout a program of study even if we place them in a particular conceptual order. [14] Ideas are complex, humans are integrated beings, and analogies always seem to break down at some point.
Logical movement, however, is fundamental to the comprehension of ideas, and “the power of illustration” is “a most important tool in the teacher’s art.” [15] I crafted this analogy for theologians wading slowly into the world of CCE as an aid in comprehending the pedagogical philosophy of CCE. I hope it likewise proves useful for CCE teachers who have devoted their capacities primarily to the liberal arts rather than theological studies. My prayer is that this analogical exercise benefits those who read this—and that theologians, classical educators, and CCE enthusiasts can grasp from one more angle how foundations are connected to structures and how structures are adorned with creativity.
Soli Deo Gloria.
Endnotes
[1] Without expounding too deeply on various philosophies of teaching, the format is often lecture-based rather than discussion based.
[2] Dorothy Sayers, “The Lost Tools of Learning,” The National Review (Aug 1, 1959), 241-242.
[3] Douglas Wilson, Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning (Wheaton, IL: Good News Publishers, 1991), 94.
[4] Edward W. Klink III and Darian R. Lockett, Understanding Biblical Theology: A Comparison of Theory and Practice (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2012), 79.
[5] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1997), E-book.
[6] Jeremy Kimble and Chad Spellman, Invitation to Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2020), 16.
[7] Jason S. DeRouchie, Oren. R. Martin, and Andy. D. Naselli, 40 Questions about Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2020), 20.
[8] Sayers, 242.
[9] Kevin DeYoung, “Your Theological System Should Tell You How to Exegete,” The Gospel Coalition (Feb 23, 2012); Steve Holmes, “The Place of Theology in Exegesis,” Shored Fragments (Mar 6, 2012).
[10] John Webster, The Domain of the Word (London, ENG: T&T Clark, 2012), 142.
[11] Hence many works on ST begin with a “prolegomenon” or critical introduction to theology.
[12] Christopher A. Perrin, An Introduction to Classical Education: A Guide for Parents (Camp Hill, PA: Classical Academic Press, 2004), 19.
[13] With the caveat that unregenerate persons are blind to the truths of Christ (2 Cor 4:3-4).
[14] Perrin, 21.
[15] John Milton Gregory, The Seven Laws of Teaching (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2004), 28.
