ABSTRACT
Epistemological foundationalism claimed to have the means to assess epistemic practices, showing which were rational and which were irrational. Theologians often accept, uncritically, that philosophers will tell them what it is for statements to be meaningful. Paul Holmer's complaint against the liberal is that he either thinks that what is fundamental can be discovered by historical investigation or else extends the notions of history and factuality in a technical usage of his own devising. Appreciating the grammatical role of theology has two important consequences. First, 'the theologian gets no new revelation and has no special organ for knowledge. He is debtor to what we, in one sense, have already — the Scriptures and the lives and the thoughts of the faithful'. Second, 'this puts theology within the grasp of conscientious tentmakers, tinkers like Bunyan, lay people like Brother Lawrence, and maybe someone you know down the street who shames you with his or her grasp'.
