Podcasts about Duns Scotus

The episode explores Hegel's complex understanding of freedom as self-determination and its historical evolution through time, juxtaposed with Kant and Rousseau's perspectives. It emphasizes that freedom is a relational and collective struggle that necessitates recognition and social action, questioning the practical implications of Hegel's thought in contemporary movements for change. - Examining Hegel's definition of freedom as self-determination- Historical context: freedom's evolution through societies- The importance of temporality in understanding freedom- Comparing Hegel with Kant and Rousseau on freedom- Duns Scotus' radical contingency vs. Hegel's causal necessity- Practical implications: social struggles for freedom today - Connecting Hegelian philosophy to contemporary movementsSend us a text Musis by Bitterlake, Used with Permission, all rights to BitterlakeSupport the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnIntro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @varnvlogblue sky: @varnvlog.bsky.socialYou can find the additional streams on YoutubeCurrent Patreon at the Sponsor Tier: Jordan Sheldon, Mark J. Matthews, Lindsay Kimbrough, RedWolf, DRV, Kenneth McKee, JY Chan, Matthew Monahan

What is the note you are being called to add to the great universal orchestra? Today Richard helps us unpack Chapter 12 of Eager to Love, "John Duns Scotus: Anything but a Dunce". Mike and Paul are then joined by Sr Mary Beth Ingham, who shares her journey of understanding Scotus. Ingham addresses the title of her book Scotus for Dunces: An Introduction to the Subtle Doctor, explaining its playful yet meaningful approach to making Scotus's complex ideas accessible. The three discuss the importance of individuality within the context of community, the Univocity of being as a bridge between human experience and divine understanding, and the significance of recognizing the dignity of each person's experience. The conversation culminates in a reflection on the mysticism of Scotus and why his teachings matter for us today. Sr. Mary Beth Ingham, CSJ currently serves as Congregational Leader of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Orange, California. Mary Beth is Professor Emerita, LMU Philosophy Dept and formerly Professor of Philosophical Theology at the Franciscan School of Theology. She holds a doctorate in Medieval Philosophy from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland and has published widely on the thought of Franciscan Master Blessed John Duns Scotus. Her monographs include Scotus for Dunces: An Introduction to the Subtle Doctor (2003), Rejoicing in the Works of the Lord: Beauty in the Franciscan Tradition (2009), The Harmony of Goodness: Mutuality and Moral Living in John Duns Scotus (2012), and Understanding John Duns Scotus: Of Realty the Rarest-Veined Unraveller (2017). In her research, she argues that the spirituality of beauty, the via pulchritudinis, is at the heart of the Franciscan intellectual tradition.  Hosted by CAC Staff: Paul Swanson, and Drew Jackson Resources: Grab a copy of Eager to Love here. The transcript for this episode can be found here. Learn more about Sr Mary Beth Ingham's books, here.

In this conversation, Dr. Tom Ward joins the shot to talk about his journey to Catholicism, the role of family in nurturing belief, and the theological and philosophical contributions of Blessed John Duns Scotus to the Catholic Tradition. Our dialogue explores the challenges faced by converts, the importance of understanding church history, and the nuances of Scotus's thought, particularly regarding univocity and analogy in relation to God and creation, misconceptions about Bl. John Duns Scotus' association with nominalism, his unique perspectives on individuality and the nature of the will, and his intriguing theory about the fall of Satan and its implications for understanding moral choices. We wrap up with a brief discussion on Stoicism, its resurgence in modern times, and the relevance of Boethius' thoughts in this context. Ordered by Love: https://angelicopress.com/products/or... After Stoicism (SOLD OUT!): https://bookstore.wordonfire.org/prod... Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Dr. Tom Ward and His Work 01:27 Dr. Ward's Journey to Catholicism 15:57 The Role of Family in Faith 16:22 Exploring Blessed John Duns Scotus 23:32 Univocity and Analogy in Scotus's Thought 30:39 Understanding Duns Scotus and Nominalism 39:38 The Individuality and Haecceity in Scotus' Thought 47:07 The Fall of Satan: Duns Scotus' Unique Perspective 57:44 Stoicism and Its Relevance Today

Duns Scotus, Docetism, sophistry in philosophy are only some of the topics in today's Called to Communion.

Duns Scotus, Docetism, sophistry in philosophy are only some of the topics in today's Called to Communion.

In this episode, we talk with Tom Ward about divine free will, focusing on Duns Scotus's view of divine free will and the act of creation.Tom's website: https://www.thomasmward.com/Tom's book, Ordered by Love: An Introduction to John Duns Scotus: https://angelicopress.com/products/ordered-by-love?srsltid=AfmBOoo6x3lkxblphcS_BASqIQmPqR6wr6ZO6objsyEtwLdgGrTyl5G9Twitter: https://twitter.com/thefreewillshowInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/thefreewillshow/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/The-Free-Will-Show-105535031200408/

Today's show is about one of the titans of medieval thought - John Duns Scotus. Scotus was one of the most influential scholastics - right behind Thomas Aquinas. In this episode I'm going to go off into the weeds a bit to explain some of the details of the medieval school of thought known as Scholasticism and other topics. Hopefully you find the side-trips helpful.https://whytheology.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/church-history-minute-john-duns-scotus/https://iep.utm.edu/john-duns-scotus/https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05194a.htmhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/23801483

This lecture was given on September 16, 2023, at the Thomistic Circles Conference at the Dominican House of Studies For more information on upcoming events, please visit our website at www.thomisticinstitute.org. About the speaker: Born and raised in Canada, Joseph Wawrykow did his doctoral work at Yale University and has taught at Notre Dame since graduation. He specializes in 13th-century Western theology, and has published on a wide range of central theological topics (Trinity; Christ; grace and predestination; sacraments; biblical interpretation) in high medieval theology. While he is best known for his work on the theology of Thomas Aquinas, his scholarly interests extend to other scholastic theologians, as well as to the varieties of medieval spiritual theology. In his research, he is attentive to issues of reception and transformation, showing the medieval scholastic theological achievement in its complex relations with the theologies of the early Fathers. Wawrykow has directed numerous doctoral dissertations, on such figures as William of Auxerre, Angela of Foligno, Duns Scotus, and, Aquinas. He has received University recognition for his teaching, both undergraduate and graduate, and has been entrusted with several leadership responsibilities by his Department, including lengthy stints as Director of Undergraduate Studies and as Director of Graduate Studies (Ph.D.) He is married to an art historian (Yale Ph.D.); their son did his undergraduate work at Yale and is currently pursuing doctoral studies in Mathematics at the University of Michigan.

Who is Bl. John Duns Scotus? What was he known for? We bring in a Dominican to talk about this Franciscan. Fr. Bonaventure Chapman discusses with us: Who is Bl. John Duns Scotus? What did he preach? Distinctions between the will and the intellect. Was there actual friction between St. Thomas Aquinas and Bl. John Duns Scotus? We also reference this book by Dr. Thomas Ward, "Ordered by Love". Exodus 90 – JOIN US Sign up for The Loop – Are you in the Loop? Get the headlines, the best of blogs, your saint of the day, the daily Scripture readings… sign up today. Support Us on Patreon Become a Patron! Over 40 interviews, a course with Karlo Broussard, a 10 part series on the domestic church, a course on fitness and virtue by Pat Flynn, and free thank you gifts for supporting the show! Click here to join Join Our 2024 Pilgrimage Select International Tours in the best in the business. We are planning on a 2024 pilgrimage. Click here so you won't miss it. Living Beyond Sunday: Making Your Home a Holy Place Our new book is available for pre-order from Ascension Press! “I love this book. It provides wise counsel with beautiful simplicity. So, if you are looking to safeguard your family life from the wiles of the enemy and encourage your spouse and children to become the saints God is calling them to be, this is a book for you.” – Fr Gregory Pine Home life can be difficult and busy, and it's easy to get distracted from the point of it all: raising a family of saints. In Living Beyond Sunday: Making Your Home a Holy Place, two married couples share what has helped them make their homes a place of encounter with God–a place where saints are being made. Want to help The Catholic Man Show? By giving us a rating on iTunes, it helps others find the show. Want to say up with The Catholic Man Show? Sign up for our mailing list: Click Here Looking for a prayer to pray with your wife? Check this blog out. Are you getting our emails? Sign up for our newsletter where we give you all bacon content – never spam.  SIGN UP HERE:

Dr. Ward's Book: https://www.amazon.com/Ordered-Love-Introduction-John-Scotus-ebook/dp/B0BNLZ47BX?ref_=ast_author_dp

I read from dump to dunce cap.     Duncan Phyfe sure loved cabinets. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Phyfe     Well I was very wrong about John Duns Scotus based on the tiny amount of information I was given in the dictionary. He seems to have been actually incredibly smart and was interested in things like metaphysics, theology, logic, epistemology, ethics, and more! It's very strange that his name became associated with "dunce". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duns_Scotus     The word of the episode is "dump".     Theme music from Tom Maslowski https://zestysol.com/     Merchandising! https://www.teepublic.com/user/spejampar     "The Dictionary - Letter A" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter B" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter C" on YouTube   "The Dictionary - Letter D" on YouTube     Featured in a Top 10 Dictionary Podcasts list! https://blog.feedspot.com/dictionary_podcasts/     Backwards Talking on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmIujMwEDbgZUexyR90jaTEEVmAYcCzuq     dictionarypod@gmail.com https://www.facebook.com/thedictionarypod/ https://twitter.com/dictionarypod https://www.instagram.com/dictionarypod/ https://www.patreon.com/spejampar https://www.tiktok.com/@spejampar 917-727-5757

E se a Reforma for mais católica do que estamos acostumados a pensar? Neste segundo episódio da minissérie sobre a relação entre Reforma e secularização, damos palco a autores que contestam a narrativa de Brad Gregory e até a de Charles Taylor, apresentada no episódio anterior. Mostrando precedentes medievais para práticas modernas que a Reforma tentou corrigir, bem como sua continuidade com a igreja medieval e patrística, tentamos descobrir o que realmente deu errado para que a secularização viesse à tona na modernidade. Veja uma transcrição deste episódio em nosso blog. Na Pilgrim você também pode ver mais detalhes a excelente resposta de Kevin Vanhoozer a críticas contemporâneas à Reforma. _____ PARA SE APROFUNDAR Brad Gregory. The Unintended Reformation. Charles Taylor. A Secular Age. Brad Littlejohn. “The civil magistrate” em Protestant Social Teaching. Carl Trueman. “Taylor's complex, incomplete historical narrative” in Our Secular age. Richard Cross. “'Where Angels Fear to Tread': Duns Scotus and Radical Orthodoxy, Antonianum 76 (2001) Richard Muller. “Not Scotist”. Reformation and Renaissance Review. 2012. Kevin Vanhoozer. Autoridade bíblica pós-Reforma. Peter Harrison. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Dru Johnson. Filosofia bíblica. Ensaios de Mark Noll, Karin Maag e John Witte em Protestantism after 500 years. Paul C. H. Lim. “Not Solely Sola Scriptura, or, a Rejoinder to Brad S. Gregory's The Unintended Reformation” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies46:3, September 2016 Pieter Vos. Longing for the good life: virtue ethics after Protestantism. Jaroslav Pelikan. 'The Tragic Necessity of the Reformation', Christian Century, 9 September. 1959, 1017. Ephraim Radner. The Reformation Wrongly Blamed. First Things. _____ JÁ CONHECE A PILGRIM? A nossa plataforma oferece acesso a conteúdos cristãos de qualidade no formato que você preferir. Na Pilgrim você encontra audiolivros, ebooks, palestras, resumos, livros impressos e artigos para cada momento do seu dia e da sua vida: https://thepilgrim.com.br/ _____ SEJA PILGRIM PREMIUM Seja um assinante da Pilgrim e tenha acesso a mais de 9000 livros, cursos, artigos e muito mais em uma única assinatura mensal: https://thepilgrim.com.br/seja-um-assinante Quais as vantagens? Acesso aos originais Pilgrim + Download ilimitado para ouvir offline + Acesso a mais de 9.000 títulos! + Frete grátis na compra de livros impressos em nossa loja _____ SIGA A PILGRIM No Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pilgrim.app/ no Twitter: https://twitter.com/AppPilgrim no TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@pilgrimapp e no YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCy1lBN2eNOdL_dJtKnQZlCw Entre em contato através do contato@thepilgrim.com.br. Em suma é um podcast original Pilgrim. Todos os direitos reservados. O ponto de vista deste texto é de responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es) e colaboradores diretos, não refletindo necessariamente a posição da Pilgrim ou de sua equipe de profissionais.

In this episode we discuss the metaphysical and physical question: Are Jesus and Mary's physical bodies (as they ascended or were assumed) in Heaven? By "Heaven" here, I mean that interim-state between when we die and when we are resurrected on the last day. I give reference to Duns Scotus' and Bonaventure's answers to this question, as well as give some thoughts of my own. www.catholicisminthecar.com --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/parker-zurbuch6/support

Expelled from France in 1303 after he sided with Pope Boniface VIII in a dispute with King Philip IV, John Duns Scotus advanced a theory of natural law that was much more limited in scope than that of the more famous Thomas Aquinas. Among other things, we explore his contention that property rights are based on positive law rather than natural law. Though he was extremely influential in the high middle ages, Scotus fell from favor in the early modern period as both the Protestants and the humanists rejected his position. They hated him so much, they even gave his name to the 'Dunce Cap.'

In this episode of the Parker's Pensées Podcast, I'm joined once again by Dr. Thomas Ward to discuss his work. This time we discuss his new work on John Duns Scotus. We discuss Duns Scotus's unique arguments for God and his contribution to the metaphysics of haecceity and quiddity. Grab the book here to support my podcast: https://amzn.to/3HCNrqX If you like this podcast, then support it on Patreon for $3, $5 or more a month. Any amount helps, and for $5 you get a Parker's Pensées sticker and instant access to all the episode as I record them instead of waiting for their release date. Check it out here: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/parkers_pensee If you want to give a one-time gift, you can give at my Paypal: https://paypal.me/ParkersPensees?locale.x=en_US Check out my merchandise at my Teespring store: https://teespring.com/stores/parkers-penses-merch Come talk with the Pensées community on Discord: dsc.gg/parkerspensees Sub to my Substack to read my thoughts on my episodes: https://parknotes.substack.com/ Check out my blog posts: https://parkersettecase.com/ Check out my Parker's Pensées YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYbTRurpFP5q4TpDD_P2JDA Check out my other YouTube channel on my frogs and turtles: https://www.youtube.com/c/ParkerSettecase Check me out on Twitter: https://twitter.com/trendsettercase Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/parkers_pensees/ Time Is Running by MusicLFiles Link: https://filmmusic.io/song/6203-time-is-running License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/parkers-pensees/support

Dr. Tom Ward joins Philosophy for the People to discuss the natural theology & philosophy of God of John Duns Scotus. What is Duns Scotus's argument for God? How does Duns Scotus's philosophy of God compare to Thomas Aquinas's? How do we account for the unique individuality of each McDonald's McNugget Buddy? All this and more!   Be sure to subscribe to Pat's philosophy Substack: https://chroniclesofstrength.substack.com/ 

IntroductionToday, we are diving deeper into the miracle of the Incarnation. What were the effects of the Incarnation on Christ and on us? How did the world fundamentally shift 2,000 years ago?! If you have not yet listened to part 1 of this two-parter, I highly recommend beginning there. I went over some fairly deep theology of what the Incarnation means and what the Hypostatic Union of the divine and human natures of Christ in one Divine Person is.The Fittingness of the Incarnation According to AquinasSt. Thomas Aquinas asks a series of really cool questions about the Incarnation in question 1 of the third part of the Summa. In this section, he focuses entirely on what he calls the “fittingness” of the Incarnation. When Aquinas speaks of fittingness, he is juxtaposing this term with necessity. In other words, is an event or action in theology strictly necessary or simply fitting? In the first two questions, he explores this query..Is it fitting for God to become incarnate?First, Aquinas asks: “Is it fitting for God to become incarnate?” We know that God is good; this is one the realities of His essence. God exists and He is the truth, the good, the beautiful, and the ground of being itself. Aquinas argues that because of His great and perfect goodness, He desired to share His goodness in the highest manner possible to His creature. So, St. Thomas concludes that it is “manifest that it was fitting that God should become incarnate (ST III, q. 1, a. 1, co.)” Was it necessary for the restoration of the human race?Even though it is a tremendous mystery that God would condescend to become one of us, it was fitting because of His great goodness. But what about necessary? “Was it necessary for the restoration of the human race?” asks Aquinas. He answers that:“What frees the human race from perdition is necessary for the salvation of man. But the mystery of Incarnation is such; according to John 3:16: ‘God so loved the world as to give His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him may not perish, but may have life everlasting.' Therefore it was necessary for man's salvation that God should become incarnate (ST III, q. 1, a. 2, s.c.).”So, because of the sin of Adam and Eve, it was necessary that God should become incarnate. As God, He can reconcile us to Himself; as Man, He can do so on our behalf!If there had been no sin, would God have become incarnate?This leads to St. Thomas' next question: “If there had been no sin, would God have become incarnate?” This question is one of my favorites to contemplate. It was actually the topic of a great conversation for me and my coworkers at lunch a couple weeks ago. In Romans, St. Paul shows us that all men were made sinners through the disobedience of Adam and it was through the one Man, Jesus Christ, that many will be made righteous. In the first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul says: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive (1 Cor. 15:22).” Jesus Christ is, thus, the “new Adam” or the “second Adam.” As St. John Henry Newman wrote in his hymn “Praise to the Holiest in the height”:“O loving wisdom of our God!When all was sin and shame,A second Adam to the fightAnd to the rescue came.”It is clear that Scripture teaches that the reason for the Incarnation is the sin of Adam. So, how does Aquinas answer this question: “If there had been no sin, would God have become incarnate?” He says,“... the word of Incarnation was ordained by God as a remedy for sin; so that, had sin had not existed, Incarnation would not have been. And yet the power of God is not limited to this; even had sin not existed, God could have become incarnate (ST III, q. 1, a. 3, co.).”Whether God became incarnate in order to take away actual sin, rather than to take away original sin?God could have become incarnate, even in the absence of human sin. But, as it is, Adam did sin and the incarnation allowed for the stain of original sin to be washed away. But what about personal sin, or as the Church calls it: “actual sin.” St. Thomas asks: “Whether God became incarnate in order to take away actual sin, rather than to take away original sin?”He answers directly that the principle reason for the incarnation was to take away original sin. But he adds:“It is certain that Christ came into this world not only to take away that sin which is handed on originally to posterity, but also in order to take away all sins subsequently added to it; not that all are taken away (ST III, q. 1, a. 4, co.).”Whether it was fitting that God should become incarnate in the beginning of the human race?On the next question: “Whether it was fitting that God should become incarnate in the beginning of the human race?” Aquinas has a lot to say, but we can summarize it thusly:“... God became incarnate at the most fitting time; and it was not fitting that God should become incarnate at the beginning of the human race (ST III, q. 1, a. 5, s.c.).” Whether Incarnation ought to have been put off till the end of the world?In God's timing, the incarnation was unfitting to happen right after the sin of Adam and Eve, but St. Thomas asks “Whether Incarnation ought to have been put off till the end of the world?” He answers:“It is written (Habakkuk 3:2): ‘In the midst of the years Thou shalt make it known.' Therefore the mystery of Incarnation which was made known to the world ought not to have been put off till the end of the world (ST III, q. 1, a. 6, s.c.).”Put simply: the incarnation happened exactly when and where was best, in God's Providence and with His perfect knowledge and planning.The Effects of the Incarnation on Christ HimselfThe Incarnation of Christ was fitting and necessary for the salvation of man. But what were the effects on Christ Himself? First, we can think of our own body and soul. We are limited and finite. We have inclinations to sin and imperfections. We are sinful and sorrowful. We are intrinsically good and capable of wonderful things, by God's grace. But we are also capable of great evil. As we discussed last time, the human nature of Jesus Christ is perfect and perfectly subordinate to His Divinity. He is incapable of sin and acts in the perfection for which mankind was originally made. What does that look like? Perfection. Living in accord with the Will of the Father, perfectly. What is possible? The great St. Athanasius, discussing the Incarnation, says this: “And, in a word, the achievements of the Saviour, resulting from His becoming man, are of such kind and number, that if one should wish to enumerate them, he may be compared to men who gaze at the expanse of the sea and wish to count its waves. For as one cannot take in the whole of the waves with his eyes, for those which are coming on baffle the sense of him that attempts it; so for him that would take in all the achievements of Christ in the body, it is impossible to take in the whole, even by reckoning them up, as those which go beyond his thought are more than those he thinks he has taken in. Better is it, then, not to aim at speaking of the whole, where one cannot do justice even to a part, but, after mentioning one more, to leave the whole for you to marvel at. For all alike are marvelous, and wherever a man turns his glance, he may behold on that side the divinity of the Word, and be struck with exceeding great awe (Athanasius, On the Incarnation, 54.4-5).” The Incarnation is a Miracle and our Blessed Lord is the perfect Man. He shows us what God intended from the beginning for mankind. So, let us take a moment to zoom in: what effects did the Incarnation have on the human body and human soul of Christ?On the Body of ChristJesus Christ had a human body, as we do. He knows our human limitations and is like us. In Hebrews 4:15, we hear: “We have not a high priest, who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.” Before His Resurrection from the dead, the Body of Christ was subject to all the bodily weaknesses caused by original sin, which we are all subject: He experienced hunger, thirst, pain, fatigue, and death. These are all natural results of human nature which He assumed. There are a couple of things in the body, however, which Christ did not necessarily experience. It is possible that He had no bodily deformities (until His Passion) and never got sick. St. Athanasius persuasively argues this by saying that it would be “unbecoming that He should heal others who was Himself not healed (P.G., XX, 133).”On the Human Soul of ChristWhen speaking of the human soul of Christ, there are a few areas worth mentioning: His intellect, will, sanctity, and likes and dislikes. In the WillJesus was entirely sinless. Thomists following after St. Thomas Aquinas, as well as Francisco Suarez, and the Society of Jesus all argue that sin is incompatible with the Hypostatic Union. It is safe to assume that this is the case simply on the merits of Dominicans and Jesuits being in agreement (just a joke). Those following the teaching of Duns Scotus say that the sinlessness of Christ is not due to the Hypostatic Union but due to a special Divine Providence similar to the way that it is impossible for the blessed in Heaven to sin.No matter which theological avenue you take, it is an article of faith, to be held definitively, taught at the Council of Ephesus, that Christ never sinned. Jesus Christ is a Divine Person and God cannot turn away from Himself.We also want to take great care to acknowledge the total liberty of Christ, in His human will. After the Incarnation, the will of Christ remained. If this were not the case, then in the matter of death, Christ could not have merited nor satisfied the justice of God for us. St. Thomas Aquinas not only believed in the total liberty of the human will of Christ, but he also provided seventeen different explanations for why this is true!In the IntellectLet us now turn to the human intellect of Christ. Every time the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord comes around, I brace for the incredibly ridiculous homilies in which the deacon or priest (or God, help us, bishops) explain that it was at this moment that Christ realized His mission. They hold that it was at the Baptism of the Lord, when the Spirit descends like a dove, that Christ receives His anointing, grace, and His mission. I want to say unequivocally that this is heretical and nonsensical garbage. The soul of Christ was endowed with the Beatific Vision from the beginning of its existence. For the first moment in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary, when the Hypostatic Union came into being, the human soul of Christ beheld the Godhead in its fullness.Like Adam and Eve, Christ had infused knowledge. God the Father revealed many things to Jesus in His humanity all at once, as needed. He also acquired human knowledge through His senses and imagination. The human soul of Christ had a beginning and is not, therefore, infinite as God is infinite. But by the grace of union, His human soul (intellect and will) was most perfect and embraced the widest range possible. Sanctity of Christ From the first moment, in the Hypostatic Union, Jesus Christ enjoyed the grace of union. As St. Augustine teaches:“When the Word was made Flesh then, indeed, He sanctified Himself in Himself, that is, Himself as Man in Himself as Word; for that Christ is One Person, both Word and Man, and renders His human nature holy in the holiness of the Divine nature (Augustine, In Johan. tract. 108, n. 5, in P.L., XXXV, 1916).”St. John also tells us in the prologue of His Gospel that the Word was “full of grace (Jn. 1:14).” And, so, in the human soul of Christ, there was a fullness of sanctifying grace. This is the same grace of the sacraments that we receive at our Baptism and in each of the seven sacraments. Likes and Dislikes In the Hypostatic Union, Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man. This glorious union, however, does not deprive the human soul of Christ of the human reality of likes and dislikes. There were certain foods that Jesus preferred. He likely had a favorite game or sport, a favorite joke or turn of phrase, a favorite way to recline at a table that He found most comfortable, and the list goes on. We see in the Gospels that Christ was angry, fearful, sad, happy, and experienced the sensible affections of hope, desire, and joy. After all, He is like us in all things but sin. His likes and dislikes, however, were under complete control by His human will subordinated perfectly to His divine will. The God-Man and the “Communication of Idioms”How we speak about Christ matters, if we are to avoid error. Our words will never fully penetrate the deep mysteries of the Person of Jesus Christ, but there are certain ways of phrasing things that are just plain wrong. In the last part of this two-parter, we discussed a few different Christological heresies that can serve as an illustration of this.How then can we speak about the interaction of deity and humanity in the Divine Person of Jesus Christ? The Church gives us the concept of the communicatio idiomatum (Latin: communication of properties or communication of idioms). There are difficulties that require such a convention. What properties belong to Jesus in His human nature? What properties belong to His divine nature? Is it possible that these properties are shared or mingled between the two natures?Jesus did many things physically which are attributed to His divine power. For example, He healed the sick, forgave sins, walked on water, changed water into wine, and rose from the dead. Though Jesus Christ, the God-man did all of these things, because of the communicatio idiomatum, we can safely say that God did all these things. God healed the sick. God walked on water. God changed water into wine. We are not saying that the properties of Christ's divinity become the properties of His humanity, or vice versa; they are already deeply united by grace. But we rightly say these things because Jesus Christ, even in His humanity, is a Divine Person. So, whatever is affirmed of the Divine Person, the Son of God, the Word made Flesh, Jesus Christ, after the incarnation, in His human or divine natures is attributed to the one Person. This is why St. Ignatius of Antioch referred to the “blood of God” and the “suffering of God.” God the Father has no blood nor did God the Spirit suffer, but the Eternal Word of God, God the Son, assumed Flesh. This is why we can rightly say that Mary is the Theotokos (the God-bearer) rather than merely the Christotokos (the Christ-bearer).There is an excellent summary of the “rules” of the communicatio idiomatum on encyclopedia.com, of all places. You can check that our here, if you are interested in reading further.  The Adoration of the Humanity of ChristThe Greek word dulia refers to veneration. This is the type of respect that is due to the saints and angels on account of their holiness and closeness to God. The next step up is hyperdulia; this is the preeminent veneration and devotion due to the Blessed Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven. Finally, we arrive at true worship and adoration, in Greek: latria. Latria is due to God alone. In fact, giving latria to anyone other than God would be the grave sin of blasphemy. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains:“The human nature of Christ, united hypostatically with the Divine nature, is adored with the same worship as the Divine nature. We adore the Word when we adore Christ the Man; but the Word is God. The human nature of Christ is not at all the reason of our adoration of Him; that reason is only the Divine nature (CE).”We do not worship the human nature of Jesus Christ. Yet, we affirm that because of the Hypostatic Union, the divinity and humanity of Christ cannot be separated. And, most importantly, there is only one Person in Jesus Christ, which is the Divine Word of God. So, according to the whole Person rather than the parts, we truly adore Jesus Christ, the God-man, with all the devotion, love, and worship due to Almighty God! Effects of the Incarnation on UsFinally, we come to the big question, for us: why did the Word of God become Flesh? How did the Incarnation affect us? In Order to Save UsFirst, as we acclaim in the Nicene Creed: “For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit, he came incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.” The Word became Flesh for us “in order to save us by reconciling us with God (CCC 456).” Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of the world, both original and personal, though He Himself was without sin. He did this in our place as the Son of Man and He did this perfectly as the Son of God.St. Gregory of Nyssa, one of the Eastern Church Fathers, explains:“Sick, our nature demanded to be healed; fallen, to be raised up; dead, to rise again. We had lost the possession of the good; it was necessary for it to be given back to us. Closed in the darkness, it was necessary to bring us the light; captives, we awaited a Savior; prisoners, help; slaves, a liberator. Are these things minor or insignificant? Did they not move God to descend to human nature and visit it, since humanity was in so miserable and unhappy a state (St. Gregory of Nyssa, Orat. catech 15: PG 45, 48B.)?”That We Might Know God's LoveSecond, the Son of God incarnated that we might know God's love. As St. Thomas Aquinas taught, it was fitting that God should become man in order to show us the depths of His love and the heights of His goodness. The Incarnation is a tremendous miracle and mystery. The fact that Almighty God, containing all things and yet uncontained Himself, became a baby. He depended on the love and care of His Holy Mother and St. Joseph. In His unfathomable humility, the Lord shows us the lengths God was willing to go to in order to bring us back from sin and death. Of course, we see His loving action on full display, bearing the Cross for our sakes. “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).”To Be Our Model for HolinessThird, Jesus Christ, the Word made Flesh, shows us the model for holiness. By His holy example, we can follow Him in all things, Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. There is an old blessing that speaks of discipleship: “May you be covered in the dust of the Master.” By following so near to Jesus, we are covered in the dust which His holy feet kick up as He leads us. If we listen to His holy words and holy example, we will be beckoned closer to sharing eternal life with Him in Heaven. To Make Us Partakers of the Divine NatureSt. Peter begins his second letter in this way:“His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire (2 Peter 1:3-4).”The chief of the Apostles reveals to us another reason why the Word became Flesh. He came to make us “partakers of the divine nature.” As St. Irenaeus said,“For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God (St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 19, 1: PG 7/1, 939.).”The great St. Athanasius put it even more succinctly: “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God (St. Athanasius, De inc. 54, 3: PG 25, 192B.).” And lest we think that this notion is peculiar to the first millennium, St. Thomas Aquinas said, “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods (St. Thomas Aquinas, Opusc. 57, 1-4.).”Receiving Sanctifying GraceThe primary means of receiving sanctifying grace in our soul and sharing in the divine nature is through the Sacrament of Baptism. We enter the sacramental life through the door of Baptism and God comes to dwell within us as in a Temple. We receive an infusion of the divine life and have the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity operative in our soul. This initiation, begun in Baptism, is perfected and strengthened in the Sacrament of Confirmation. Our initiation is complete when we receive the Lord's own Body and Blood in the Holy Eucharist, the Sacrament of sacraments. The same Flesh born of Mary, the Word of God Incarnate, comes to us under the veil of a sacrament at Holy Mass in what looks like bread and looks like wine. But this is no ordinary food. It is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ who desires to make Himself our supersubstantial bread and come into intimate communion with us. This foretaste of Heaven leads us as a pledge of future glory to our eternal home. The Incarnation goes beyond the cave in Bethlehem, beyond the home in Nazareth, beyond the Temple in Jerusalem, beyond the wood of the Cross, and beyond the empty grave. In the Sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist, the Incarnation is extended. Just as we are body and soul, the Lord commanded that His Church should be visible and invisible. Our invisible God has taken on visible Flesh. So too, the Church celebrates in sensible signs the invisible wonders of God's overwhelming grace. The most amazing part of all of this is that He invites us to respond and take part in these saving mysteries and realities. Praise be to God for such a gift!I will end with the words of Pope St. Leo the Great:Christian, remember your dignity, and now that you share in God's own nature, do not return by sin to your former base condition. Bear in mind who is your head and of whose body you are a member. Do not forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of God's kingdom.If you have enjoyed this post in the slightest, please consider sharing it with your friends and family on social media, text, or email! Thank you! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit willwrightcatholic.substack.com

Jordan and Hunter talk with Tom Ward about Scotus. They cover topics like: What first drew you to Scotus? Why have you found him worthy of so much of your time? Who was Scotus? Why isn't he as admired as he should be? What does Scotus mean by univocity? Why should Scotus's approach not be controversial? Should we be skeptical of Scotus? And more!Resources:1) Ordered by Love, Tom WardSupport the show

Readings for the Fourth Sunday of Advent - Isaiah 7:10-14; Matthew 1:18-24My friends, the time of waiting is coming to an end. But just what is the purpose? What exactly are we waiting for and why do we celebrate it? Ambrose and Duns Scotus would tell you - it's all in the name. Special thanks to Bridget Zenk for our intake and outtake music. Have a comment, critique or a challenge? Throw it my way at pdjoezenk@gmail.com. Thanks for listening and blessed fourth week of Advent!

In this short episode, I give some resources for people interested in finding and reading Blessed John Duns Scotus' "Ordinatio." www.catholicisminthecar.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/parker-zurbuch6/support

In this episode, I give my reflections on how it feels to begin reading through the Ordinatio of Blessed John Duns Scotus. I also give an overview of how I make audiobooks from text files, which aid me greatly in reading through material. www.catholicisminthecar.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/parker-zurbuch6/support

Blessed John Duns Scotus (1265-1308), the Franciscan friar known as the "Subtle Doctor", is one of the most important theologians and philosophers of the Middle Ages, yet over the centuries he has fallen into disrepute, or at least neglect, by comparison with the "Angelic Doctor", St. Thomas Aquinas. Interest in Scotus has revived somewhat in part due to his beatification by Pope St. John Paul II, who called him the "defender of the Immaculate Conception" and "minstrel of the Incarnation". Indeed, Scotus's greatest legacy is his argument for Mary's having been conceived without original sin, a controversial position at the time, yet vindicated centuries later when this was proclaimed a dogma by Pope Bl. Pius IX. This is good enough reason to get to know Scotus, even if he ultimately takes a back seat to Aquinas. Thomas Ward, author of Ordered by Love: An Introduction to John Duns Scotus, joins the podcast to discuss aspects of Scotus's thought, and his context in the early history of the Franciscan order. Thomas Ward, Ordered by Love https://angelicopress.org/ordered-by-love-thomas-ward This podcast is a production of CatholicCulture.org. If you like the show, please consider supporting us! http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio  

The Phenomenology Booth is a virtual exhibit devoted to the philosophical field of phenomenology. The exhibit is hosted on the Wipf and Stock Blog and includes a set of interviews with philosophers and theologians working in phenomenology, as well as a selection of Wipf and Stock's books in phenomenology. You can find the link to the booth below. Dr. Emmanuel Falque is on the philosophy faculty at the Catholic University of Paris and is the founder of the International Network in Philosophy of Religion. He is also the author of many volumes on phenomenology, including his forthcoming book with Cascade, By Way of Obstacles: A Pathway through a Work. If you're listening to this on Spotify, you should know that you can also watch this interview with subtitles on YouTube. The link to the YouTube video is in the description below. PODCAST LINKS: The Phenomenology Booth: https://wipfandstock.com/blog/2022/11/29/the-phenomenology-booth/ CONNECT: Website: https://wipfandstock.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/wipfandstock Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wipfandstock Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/wipfandstock/ SOURCES MENTIONED: Dika, Tarek. Quiet Powers of the Possible: Interviews in Contemporary French Phenomenology. Falque, Emmanuel. By Way of Obstacles: A Pathway through a Work (forthcoming). ———. Crossing the Rubicon: The Borderlands of Philosophy and Theology. ———. The Guide to Gethsemane: Anxiety, Suffering, Death. ———. Hors phénomène: Essai aux confins de la phénoménalité. ———. The Loving Struggle: Phenomenological and Theological Debates. ———. The Metamorphosis of Finitude: An Essay on Birth and Resurrection. ———. The Wedding Feast of the Lamb: Eros, the Body, and the Eucharist. ———. Saint Bonaventure and the Entrance of God Into Theology. Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. ———. Duns Scotus's Doctrine of Categories and Meaning. ———. Ponderings II–VI: Black Notebooks 1931–1938. ———. Ponderings VI–XI: Black Notebooks 1938–1939. ———. Ponderings XII–XV: Black Notebooks 1939–1942. Henry, Michel. I Am the Truth: Toward a Philosophy of Christianity. ———. Incarnation: A Philosophy of Flesh. Ignatius of Loyola. The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius. Janicaud, Dominique. Phenomenology and the Theological Turn: The French Debate. Levinas, Emmanuel. Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority. Marion, Jean-Luc. God Without Being: Hors-Texte. ———. The Idol and Distance: Five Studies. ———. Reduction and Givenness: Investigations of Husserl, Heidegger, and Phenomenology. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science: With a Prelude in Rhymes and an Appendix of Songs. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism Is a Humanism. Tertullian. On the Flesh of Christ. OUTLINE: (02:00) – Describing the phenomenon (07:37) – Merleau-Ponty, Marion, and Janicaud (11:19) – Meeting Marion (18:40) – Genealogy of French phenomenology (21:00) – Science or poetry? (25:05) – Reduction, intentionality, and body (34:25) – The “counterblow” of theology (51:02) – Phenomenology as apologetics? (58:40) – The “loving struggle” with Marion (01:11:40) – Finitude (01:23:10) – Resurrection and (re)birth (01:38:02) – Animality and humanity (1:49:49) – “A pathway through a work”

In today's episode, Jeremy and Trevor turn their discussion on craft to another important element: setting. They talk about the importance of setting and provide some key terms in their discussion sure to help any up-and-coming writer or anyone who wishes to have a better understanding of the craft of fiction.Descriptive Pause -- a halt in the narration to provide a description of the setting.Mock-heroic -- giving kingly importance to an otherwise pedestrian object.The Objective Correlative -- coined by TS Eliot; the outside mirrors the inside. With respect to fiction, this means that the setting should reflect or mirror the inner state of the character.Thisness (haecceitas) -- from midieval theologian Duns Scotus -- detail that draws abstraction towards itself and seems to kill that abstraction with a puff of palpability. It makes an object this rather than just that. It personalizes the object. Significant Detail -- detail that is important to the setting or the character or the plot of the story.Insignificant Detail -- any detail that doesn't add anything to the setting, character, or plot, and so shouldn't be focused on in the prose. Significantly Insignificant Detail -- detail that seems unimportant at first, but later plays an important role. Estranging -- defamiliarizing an otherwise common object or showing it through a lens that makes it difficult to recognize. www.sleyhouse.compatreon.com/sleyhousepublishinghttps://www.instagram.com/waynehowardstudios/https://www.instagram.com/waynehowardmedia/ Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/sley-house-publishing-presents-litbits. https://plus.acast.com/s/sley-house-publishing-presents-litbits. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Saint Of The Day With Mike Roberts!

This video gives a brief overview of the life, philosophy, theology, major works, and writing style of Blessed John Duns Scouts. Our Website: www.catholicisminthecar.com If you wish to SUPPORT our work, you can visit: https://www.catholicisminthecar.com/support Podpage: https://www.podpage.com/catholicism-in-the-car/ Find Catholicism in the Car on: Anchor, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Podchaser, Audible, Amazon Music, Castbox, Radio Republic, Player FM, and Stitcher. Also find us on: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeCdyv4dtHnU4504ILGOQTg Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Catholicism-in-the-Car-107936008608917 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/catholicism.in.the.car/?hl=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/PZCatechesis Locals [In-Progress]: https://catholicisminthecar.locals.com/ View my blog at: https://www.parkerzurbuch.com/ Contact me via email at: parkerzurbuchcatechesis@gmail.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/parker-zurbuch6/support

Today's Topics: 1) Finding the Fallacy: (Propaganda) Diversion Meet the Early Church Fathers: Aphraastes of Persia 2, 3, 4) Interview

Today's Topics: 1) Finding the Fallacy: Hasty Generalization Meet the Early Church Fathers: Gregory of Nazianzus 2, 3, 4) Interview

The boys take some time to answer audience questions about the nature of the Trinity, angels, prayer, Easter, and more.

Why does John Duns Scotus still resonate, more than 700 years after his death? Tom Ward, associate professor of philosophy at Baylor, was captivated by Duns Scotus as a student. Today, he translates his work through a prestigious National Endowment for the Humanities grant and is writing an introductory book on Duns Scotus more broadly. In this Baylor Connections, Ward explains how Duns Scotus' work enables us to consider God, faith and the “first principle” still today.

Das mittelalterliche Denken ist nicht nur hell. Es ist auch voller Diskussion und genauen Unterscheidungen. Duns Scotus (1266-1308) und William von Ockham (1285-1347) gehen mit Verve der Frage nach, ob die Grund- und Allgemeinbegriffe „Universalien“ eigenständige Wesen haben oder nicht. Doch welches? Ockham kommt zur Erkenntnis, dass nur Einzeldinge (individua) ein solches Wesen haben. Sein kommt nur ihnen zu. Damit wird die Kluft zwischen Glauben und Wissen dramatisch vertieft: zum Guten oder zum Schaden von beidem? Darum kreisen die Debatten noch heute.

A lecture with Q&A by Davenant Press Editor-in-chief (and Davenant Hall instructor) Onsi Kamel entitled "The Birth of Secularity: Henry More, Metaphysics, and the Battle for God's Spirit." In recent decades, intellectual historians have attempted to chart the development of “secular modernity,” generally locating its origins in medieval or Protestant metaphysics. Key claims of these genealogies crumble under scrutiny, not least of all blaming the Reformation for a metaphysical revolution. And yet the metaphysical gulf separating the medieval and modern periods is undeniable: the world of Kant and Schleiermacher is not the world of Albertus Magnus and Duns Scotus. If historians wish to better understand the development of secularity, a more helpful entry point is a seventeenth-century debate about the immateriality of the soul, the nature of space, and the spirit of God. Central to this debate was Henry More (1614 - 1687), a Cambridge Platonist philosopher now largely forgotten, but prominent in his lifetime. In this lecture, Mr. Onsi Kamel explores More's defense of traditional metaphysics against Cartesianism. This will both illuminate how intellectual change results as much from ideas failing as it does them succeeding, and explore the origin of a key shift within modernity: moving from an analogical understanding of God to a univocal one.

On this episode, Chris is joined by thinker and writer Jack Gist (ft. on Ep. 25, Disputatio and the 1619 Project) to discuss a new essay from Jack, "Individualism, relativism, and the most extreme form of idolatry." Jack unpacks the thought of Nietzsche and Duns Scotus, and helps us understand the "both/and" of the amazing beauty of being an individual, uniquely unrepeatable as a creation of God, while at the same time being made for participation in a "higher unity", that is, the whole of mankind made for communion with God. Contemporary movements tend to skew one way or the other, either suppressing the individual to emphasize a group, or obscuring the whole for the sake of the individual. Jack highlights the deeply Christian sensibility of the founders in seeking to safeguard an individualism rightly understood, in right relation to the whole.

On this episode, Chris is joined by thinker and writer Jack Gist (ft. on Ep. 25, Disputatio and the 1619 Project) to discuss a new essay from Jack, “Individualism, relativism, and the most extreme form of idolatry.” Jack unpacks the thought of Nietzsche and Duns Scotus, and helps us understand Read more…

The Byzantine Scotist explains the philosophy of John Duns Scotus and tackles questions on Palamism and Divine Simplicity. 

In this week's episode, Clinton and Fr Jamie talk about Duns Scotus, his theological significance and legacy. Starting with a look at the metaphysical critique of Scotus inspired by the Radical Orthodoxy school, encompassing the topics of nominalism, voluntarism and the univocity of being (we will explain!), we move on to talk about the significant differences between a Thomistic view of the fall, sin and the Incarnation and that of Scotus. After all that we consider the different answers given by Thomas and Scotus to the question of whether or not the Incarnation would have happened had mankind not fallen in the beginning. Yes, we really did get through all that in about 40 minutes!Thanks for listening. To get in touch, please send an email to holycofe@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @holycofe1.

Jordan and Brandon are joined by Thomas Williams to discuss all things in relation to John Duns Scotus. They consider who Scotus is, his takes on voluntarism, univocity, and simplicity, how he fits within the medieval era, and much more.Find more info about the London Lyceum or contact us at our website.Find all of Thomas's resources on his website.Resources:1) Monologion and Proslogion, Anselm2) Philosophical Writings, John Duns Scotus3) Franciscan Institute PublicationsSupport the show

"Pain don't hurt!" Interspersed between Roadhouse references, Mark and Adam discuss medieval beliefs on mind, soul, intellect, and free will. They highlight philosophers such as St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Avicenna, and Ockham. They also invent a new superhero, Agent Intellect, point out the flaws in Bucky Barnes' Hobbit reference, and discuss the Borg!

In this episode, Mark and Adam discuss what a horse actually is and other important questions. Their discussion about medieval metaphysics leads to many interesting places, such as St. Thomas Aquinas and Avicenna, potentiality and actuality, essence and existence, and a particularly awful childhood limerick. 

In this episode, Adam explains philosophical concepts about how we come to possess knowledge and how intellect differs from faith. Much is explained about the differences between Augustine's, Aquinas', and Duns Scotus' views on our acquisition of knowledge and reason. Mark responds with "yes." Frequently. He also discusses his college experiences and divulges helpful information on how to get an A in philosophy classes. Also, there will be a t-shirt giveaway every week to the most creative or thought-provoking tweet at our Twitter, @UlmtdOpinions!

In this episode of the podcast, Daniel Houck speaks with Justus Hunter about the reason for the incarnation. They discuss why medieval theologians such as Robert Grosseteste argued that the Son of God would have become incarnate even if Adam hadn't sinned, how Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus approached the issue, and why theologians should care about it today.

Jordan and Brandon talk with Richard Cross about his new book on the "communicatio idiomatum." They ask questions like: What does the communicatio idiomatum mean? What does the council of Chalcedon require for understanding the communicatio idiomatum? What does the union of the two natures in Chalcedon mean? How was it understood by the various theologians? And more.Find more info about the London Lyceum or contact us at our website.Resources:1) Communicatio Idiomatum: Reformation Christological Debates, Richard Cross2) In Defense of Conciliar Christology: A Philosophical Essay, Tim Pawl3) Ordinato, Duns Scotus, Trans. Peter SimpsonSupport the show

Ser santo significa ser amigo de Dios, significa estar en amistad con Dios, significa estar en armonía con la Santísima Trinidad. Es estar en gracia y unión a Dios por que Dios es santo. Si estamos en unión con Dios podemos participar en la santidad de Dios. Dios nos creó a su imagen y semejanza y como tal, nos creó para estar en santidad y para ser santos. Podemos decir que ser santos es simplemente participar en la santidad y pureza de Dios. El catecismo de la iglesia católica en su numeral 2013 nos dice: 2013 “Todos los fieles, de cualquier estado o régimen de vida, son llamados a la plenitud de la vida cristiana y a la perfección de la caridad” (LG 40). Todos son llamados a la santidad: “Sed perfectos como vuestro Padre celestial es perfecto” (Mt 5, 48): Al ser santos estamos llamados a la plenitud de la vida. Por medio de la santidad podemos disfrutar verdaderamente lo que es la vida. Aparte de que todos estamos llamados a la santidad, la iglesia nos presenta ejemplos a la santidad. Estos ejemplos lo llamamos santos canonizados. Los santos canonizados son aquellas personas que vivieron una vida en armonía y amistad con Dios, los cuales se nos presentan como ejemplos de santidad. El Santo del Dia nos presenta un santo para honrar y reflexionar en ese día particular. Te invito a conocer y reflexionar un poquito sobre la vida de algunos de los tantos santos de la iglesia. ¡Acompáñame ahora y escucha el episodio! Recuerda que al principio del programa escucharas un anuncio en inglés y después escucharas el episodio.

This installment begins a short series of three episodes devoted to the life and work of the Franciscan, Blessed John Duns Scotus, a woefully under attended-to philosopher and theologian of the High Middle Ages. So we're going to try and remedy that in some small way here. Today we'll get something of an introduction to Duns Scotus by looking at some themes of his writing and thinking. We'll consider his working through the question of the Immaculate Conception, which at his time was a live and debated question. We'll also get a sense of him within the context of his Francsican way of life, with its particular emphasis on the experience of beauty. And there's no one better to start us off than today's guest, Sister Mary Beth Ingham, a Sister of St. Joseph, who is presently Professor of Philosophical Theology at the Franciscan School of Theology at the University of San Diego, as well as Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Loyola Marymount University. Sister Mary Beth has written a number of works on Duns Scotus and the Franciscan tradition, including the book we'll discuss today, Scotus for Dunces: An Introduction to the Subtle Doctor, as well as Understanding John Duns Scotus, and the related Rejoicing in the Works of the Lord: Beauty in the Franciscan Tradition. Mary Beth Ingham, CSJ, Professor of Philosophical TheologyScotus for Dunces: An Introduction to the Subtle Doctor by Mary Beth InghamUnderstanding John Duns Scotus by Mary Beth InghamRejoicing in the Works of the Lord: Beauty in the Franciscan Tradition by Mary Beth InghamFour Questions on Mary by John Duns Scotus, trans. Allan Wolter, O.F.M.Franciscan Institute PublicationsSupport the show (http://patreon.com/curiouscatholicpodcast)

The BSP Podcast turns to a paper from Matteo Valdarchi, who has studied philosophy at the Pontificial Gregorian University and at the University of Roma Tre. The recording is taken from our 2019 Annual Conference, ‘The Theory and Practice of Phenomenology’.   ABSTRACT: Since his early stages, the young Heidegger embraced with fervour the Husserlian phenomenological method (at least the one contained in the Logische Untersuchungen), although he immediately kept his distance from it, introducing a new way of doing phenomenology, independent and more fundamental. Not surprisingly, the phenomenological project that arises from his early works is called «Ursprungswissenschaft». But where can we find the seeds of this “science”? Usually, those can be identified in the course of the Kriegsontsemester (1919). The aim of this paper is to show that the very beginning of this project is, instead, in his post-doctoral dissertation, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre des Duns Scotus. The Habilitationsschrift unfolds a movement that starts from the exclusion of the Aristotelian-scholastics “metaphysics” from the question of categories (namely, of being), in favour of the immanence of the subjectivity in the judgement. With this first movement, the meaning of ‘being’ is radically transformed, changing from “being that actually exists” to “being that’s valid” [gilt] of the copula. The second movement (or counter-move) shows the intentional disposition of the logical setting, enlightening the material principle that determines logical forms: the categories of meaning that weave the sphere of language. It is at this level that the young Heidegger, although adopting the teaching of the IV research, already allows the origin of the logic to emerge from a more fundamental field, that is language, in which ‘being’ neither it’s a “is” nor it is valid, but it means. However here the language isn’t entangled in the theoretical (“circular” in 1919) subjectivity’s tangles, but it opens the way to a new understanding of the subjectivity, of the «historischer Geist». In conclusion, Heidegger’s original appropriation of the phenomenological method lies in understanding of the essence of language, as field of the subjectivity’s historically living movement.   BIO: Matteo Valdarchi studied philosophy at the Pontificial Gregorian University (until 2016) and at the University of Roma Tre (until 2018). His research area includes phenomenology and hermeneutics, particularly Heidegger's thinking. He has taken part in two national conferences, at the 62° and at the 63° Convegno di Ricerca Filosofica organized by Centro Studi Filosofici di Gallarate.   The ‘British Society for Phenomenology Annual Conference 2019 – the Theory and Practice of Phenomenology’ was held at the International Anthony Burgess Foundation, Manchester, UK, 5 – 7 September, 2019: https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/conference/   You can check out our forthcoming events here: https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/events/ The British Society for Phenomenology is a not-for-profit organisation set up with the intention of promoting research and awareness in the field of Phenomenology and other cognate arms of philosophical thought. Currently, the society accomplishes these aims through its journal, events, and podcast. Why not find out more, join the society, and subscribe to our journal the JBSP? https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/

Philosophy Podcast Spotify / The Best Philosophy Podcast On Spotify THIS PODCAST UPLOADS PHILOSOPHY LECTURES AND TEXTS WE STUMBLE UPON. WE TRY TO MAKE PHILOSOPHY AVAILABLE AS A PODCAST ON SPOTIFY, AND MAKE IT ALL DOWNLOADABLE FOR FREE. WE TRY TO BECOME THE BEST PHILOSOPHY PODCAST ON SPOTIFY WITH THE MOST PHILOSOPHY EPISODES EVER. BUY A BOOK BELOW TO KEEP US ON AIR. ------------------------------- IMPORTANT! AMAZON DELETED THE LAST INEXPENSIVE BINDING. IT WAS TOO CHEAP! HERE IS ANOTHER VERSION FOR STUDENTS WITH HOBBES, LOCKE, ROUSSEAU AND THE US CONST. IN ONE BOOK: ||| MACHIAVELLI https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/niccolo-machiavelli-and-john-locke-and-thomas-hobbes-and-peter-kanzler/the-leviathan-1651-the-two-treatises-of-government-1689-and-the-constitution-of-pennsylvania-1776/paperback/product-69m6we.html XXX https://www.bookfinder.com/search/?author=peter%2Bkanzler&title=pennsylvania%2Bconstitution%2Bleviathan&lang=en&isbn=9781716844508&new_used=N&destination=us¤cy=USD&mode=basic&st=sr&ac=qr || ROUSSEAU https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/jean-jacques-rousseau-and-thomas-hobbes-and-john-locke-and-peter-kanzler/the-leviathan-1651-the-two-treatises-of-government-1689-the-social-contract-1762-the-constitution-of-pennsylvania-1776/paperback/product-782nvr.html XXX https://www.bookfinder.com/search/?author=peter%2Bkanzler&title=pennsylvania%2Bconstitution%2Bleviathan&lang=en&isbn=9781716893407&new_used=N&destination=us¤cy=USD&mode=basic&st=sr&ac=qr | Thank You Dearly For ANY Support! And God Bless You.

Although beings different from God are actually contingent with respect to their factual existence, nevertheless, they are not with respect to their possible existence. Hence, those entities which are called contingent with respect to their factual existence are necessary with respect to their possible existence – for instance, although "There exists a man" is contingent, nevertheless "It is possible that he exists" is necessary, because his existence does not include any contradiction. Therefore, "Something – different from God – is possible" is necessary, because being is divided into the contingent and the necessary. Just as necessity belongs to a necessary being in virtue of its condition or its quiddity, so possibility belongs to a possible being in virtue of its quiddity. If the first argument is alternatively qualified with the notion of ontological possibility, then we have necessary propositions as follows: It is possible that there is something different from God – it is not of itself (because then it would not be the case that it were possible), nor from nothing. Therefore, it is possible that it is from something else. Either it is possible that the other agent acts by virtue of itself – and not by virtue of something else, not being from something else – or it is not possible. If so, then it is possible that there is a first agent, and if it [is] possible that it exists, then it exists, just as we have proved before. If not and if there is no infinite regress, then the argument at once comes to a standstill. More can and should be said about this fascinating argument, but we leave it to the reader to search out more of the argument themselves in earnest interest, thankfully to you for listening to this the metaphysical Illuminationism podcast on Anchor FM Illuminationism. Illuminationism, Scotus argued against the version of illuminationism that had been defended earlier in the century by Henry of Ghent. In his Ordinatio (I.3. he argued against the sceptical consequences that Henry claimed would follow from abandoning divine illumination. Scotus argued that if our thinking were fallible in the way Henry had believed, such illumination could not, even in principle, ensure "certain and pure knowledge." When one of those that come together is incompatible with certainty, then certainty cannot be achieved. For just as from one premise that is necessary and one that is contingent nothing follows but a contingent conclusion, so from something certain and something uncertain, coming together in some cognition, no cognition that is certain follows (Ordinatio I.3. Immaculate Conception Perhaps the most influential point of Duns Scotus's theology was his defense of the Immaculate Conception of Mary (i.e., that Mary herself was conceived without sin). At the time, there was a great deal of argument about the subject. The general opinion was that it was appropriately deferential to the Mother of God, but it could not be seen how to resolve the problem that only with Christ's death would the stain of original sin be removed. The great philosophers and theologians of the West were divided on the subject (indeed, it appears that even Thomas Aquinas sided with those who denied the doctrine, though some Thomists dispute this). The feast day had existed in the East (though in the East, the feast is just of the Conception of Mary) since the seventh century and had been introduced in several dioceses in the West as well, even though the philosophical basis was lacking. Citing Anselm of Canterbury's principle, "potuit, decuit, ergo fecit" (He [i.e., God] could do it, it was appropriate, therefore He did it), Duns Scotus devised many things. But not the metaphysical theater Anchor FM Podcast

Fr Dcn Dr Ananias Sorem joins me to discuss two important Roman Catholic figures: Anselm of Canterbury and John Duns Scotus.  We will cover the insights here and there, but mainly focus on the weaknesses in these theologians and how they do not actually provide any bridge between "Palamism" and latin theology.  The second half of this talk is available for subscribers. 

We are happy to welcome back Dr. Gaston LeNotre for his second appearance on Talking Thomism! Dr. LeNotre is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Dominican University College in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. He earned his PhD in Philosophy from the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C. In his paper "Can Thomas' Account of Individuation Survive Scotus' Objections? A CONCRETE Respone," Dr. LeNotre follows up on the work he presented in his appearance on Talking Thomism. Here, he argues that Aquinas held indeterminate dimension is the principle of individuation and considers some objections to this position taken from the Subtle Doctor himself, Duns Scotus. This talk was given at the Center for Thomistic Studies on February 22, 2019. The Center for Thomistic Studies, located at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, TX, is the only graduate program in the United States uniquely dedicated to the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas. More information about the Center can be found on our website at http://stthom.edu/CTS. For news and updates about future events, like our Facebook page: http://facebook.com/thomisticstudies Producer: John H. Boyer Announcer: Peter Gardner Intro and outro music: Clare Jensen, "Cello Suite No. 1: Prelude" by J.S. Bach.

Gesprek met Prof. dr. Andreas J. Beck, rector en gewoon hoogleraar en vakgroepvoorzitter Historische Theologie, verbonden aan de Evangelisch Theologische Faculteit Leuven aan de hand van een aantal door hem gekozen boeken van Augustinus, Duns Scotus, Thomas van Aquino, Anselmus van Canterbury, Luther, Karl Barth en Bonhoeffer. Website ETF Leuven: https://www.etf.edu/

In a homily on Bl. Scotus’ feast day in 2010, Pope Benedict XVI offered a beautifully concise summary of this shift in perspective, “…in the opinion of Duns Scotus,” he said, “the Incarnation of the Son of God, planned from all eternity by God the Father at the level of love, is the fulfilment of creation.... [It] is God's original idea of ultimately uniting with himself the whole of creation, in the Person and Flesh of the Son.” This week on TOB Tuesday, listen to Katrina explain how Christmas is a wedding.

Episode 64: Grey 17 Is Missing (Season 3, Episode 19)Synopsis: In which Garibaldi hunts down a mystery, and Delenn faces a challenge to her leadership of the Rangers.https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0517654/?ref_=ttep_ep19http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/master/guide/063.html1990s Doomsday cults? I'm stayin'!Branch Dividians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_DavidiansAum Shinrikyo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum_ShinrikyoHeaven's Gate - Tragic, and maybe our “favorite” UFO cult https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_(religious_group)Order of the Solar Temple https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Solar_TempleMax the Cat shows up at about 13:30.Duns Scotus, 13th century theologian and hair splitter quo maxime: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duns_ScotusEruv - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eruv

This talk was offered on Sept. 28,2018 to begin the Thomistic Circle "Friendly Rivals: Franciscan and Dominican Intellectual Traditions. " To learn more about upcoming Thomistic Institute events, visit: https://thomisticinstitute.org/events

Pat Sirois joins Ben and Pat to discuss John Duns Scotus.

Pat Sirois joins Ben and Pat to discuss John Duns Scotus.

Duns Scotus attacks the proposal of Aquinas and Henry of Ghent that being is subject to analogy.

Dr. Ilia Delio, OSF, presents a lecture on "Evolution and the Primacy of Christ: From Scotus to Teilhard." How do we understand the meaning of Jesus Christ in an evolutionary universe? Franciscan theologian Duns Scotus said that love and not sin was the reason for the incarnation, an idea which influenced the thought of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. This lecture will explore the theology of Pierre Teilhard through the primacy of love and the emergence of Christ in evolution. Recorded live at CTU on October 6, 2015, for the Duns Scotus Lecture.

Creation Theology and Christian Marriage: Why the Church’s Teachings on Sex and Matrimony Can’t Be Changed The Biblical self-revelation of God as “Yahweh Elohim”— the God who creates the world from nothing—provides the key to understanding the Church’s constant teaching and tradition about marriage and sexual morality. It’s not just about saying no to things people want to do, but about faith in God: about who we say God is, what the world means, and what it means to be made in His image and likeness. About Rich Bulzacchelli Dr. Rich Bulzacchelli is Associate Professor of Theology at Aquinas College and a Senior Fellow at the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology. He holds a B.A. in philosophy from Saint Vincent College, an M.A. in Christian philosophy from Marquette University, an M.A. in religious studies at Providence College, and an S.T.L. in systematic theology from the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception, and an S.T.D. from the International Marian Research Institute with a specialization in Mariology and concentrations in theological anthropology and the thought of Karol Wojtyła/Pope John Paul II. He is published on a range of topics and personalities in theology and philosophy, including medical ethics, the Virgin Mary, St. Thomas Aquinas, Bl. Duns Scotus, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope St. John Paul II, and Pope Bl. Paul VI. Bulzacchelli’s most recent book is “Elohim Created”: A New Look at the First Creation Narrative (Nashville, TN: The Aggiornamento Project, 2012).

John Duns Scotus (d. 1308), nicknamed by tradition "the Subtle Doctor," was one of the most important medieval Christian philosophers, and was notorious for the difficulty of his thought. In this episode, we hear a specialist in medieval philosophy give a conference presentation on Scotus's views on identity (sameness) and distinction (difference). Nowadays most philosophers and logicians recognize qualitative sameness (aka similarity), which comes in degrees, and numerical sameness (aka numerical or absolute identity), which doesn't come in degrees, and which is a symmetrical, transitive, and reflexive relation. This latter, numerical identity, is a relation which a thing can only bear to itself. If these are all we have to work with, then we get apparent contradictions from trinitarian claims. For instance, consider this triad of claims: The Father is God. The Son is God. The Father is not the same as the Son. If the Father is numerically identical to God (1), and so is the Son (2), then it follows (because the relation is symmetrical and transitive), that the Father and Son are numerically identical. (So, 3 is false) The above three claims, so understood, are an inconsistent triad - if any two are true, the remaining claim is false. But arguably, the "Athanasian Creed" requires them all. That is, interpreting the above triad in terms of numerical identity, there would be this valid argument: f = g s = g g = s (from 2, symmetricality) f= s (from 1 and 3, by transitivity) But 4 is a disastrous conclusion. We know that a thing can't, at the same time and in the same way, differ from itself. But according to the New Testament, the Father and Son have differed. To put it differently, numerical sameness forces indiscernibility. If any A just is some B, then A and B can't differ in the smallest way. But the Father and Son do differ, and so they must be non-identical, which is to say, numerically distinct. What does it mean to say, then, that each of them "is God." Perhaps the statements simply mean that each is divine, that each has the divine attributes or a divine nature. Father and Son would then be not numerically identical, but rather similar - that is, like one another, in respect of being divine. But then we have two beings, each of which is divine; this would appear to be two gods. What now? One response is to make additional distinctions, to argue that our concepts of numerical and qualitative sameness are not enough. This is the course pursued by John Duns Scotus. He holds that we must consider sameness and difference both in the mind, and as it were "on the side of things" in the world, and then he goes on to make further distinctions, which he thinks are relevant not only to theology, but also to more general metaphysics. Our presenter is Dr. Joshua Blander, Assistant Professor of Philosophy at The King's College in New York City. His paper is called "Being the Same without Being the Same: Duns Scotus on Identity and Distinction." Here is his handout from the presentation, which will help you to follow along. You can also listen to this episode on stitcher or itunes (please subscribe and rate us in either or both).  If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here. Links for this episode: Dr. Joshua Blander John Duns Scotus at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy at the Franciscan Archive previous  trinities posts on identity on the indiscernibility of identicals (and another) on the minority view in present-day philosophy that there can be numerical sameness without identity pro con episodes on "Before Abraham was, I am." (John 8:58): episode 62, episode 63 The Apostolic Fathers

Tue, 1 Jan 1991 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8039/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8039/1/8039.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1991): Wege zur Wahrheit. (Bonaventura u. Duns Scotus). In: Wissenschaft und Weisheit, Vol. 54: pp. 128-156. Katholische Theologie 0

Tue, 1 Jan 1985 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7803/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7803/1/7803.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1985): Die christozentrische Konzeption des Johannes Duns Scotus als Ansatz für eine Theologie der Welt. In: Wissenschaft und Weisheit, Vol. 48: pp. 182-196.

Sat, 1 Jan 1983 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7802/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7802/1/7802.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1983): Die franziskanische Theologie des Johannes Duns Scotus. In: Wissenschaft und Weisheit, Vol. 46: pp. 81-91. Katholische Theologie

Thu, 1 Jan 1981 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8029/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8029/1/8029.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1981): Johannes Duns Scotus. In: Fries, Heinrich (Hrsg.), Klassiker der Theologie. Von Irenäus bis Martin Luther. Bd. 1, Beck: München, pp. 226-237. Katholische Theologie 0

In this, the 70th Episode of CS , we take a look at Sacramentalism; a mindset that dominated the religious landscape of late Medieval Christianity.The question that consumed Europeans of the Middle Ages was, “How can I be saved? What must I believe and do that will preserve my soul from the torments of hell?”Rome answered that with what's called Sacramentalism.Now, let me be clear; the basic answer was, “Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.” But the Church went on to define what that trust looked like with a set of rules and required practices. Yes, people are saved by grace through faith, but that grace is received by special acts only authorized clergy may conduct. These acts were called “sacraments” from the word “sacred” meaning holy. But there was a specific flavor to the word sacrament that carried the idea of mystery. Precisely HOW the sacraments communicated grace was unknown, while that they did was a certainty. So while salvation was by grace, one had to go to the Church to get that grace. The sacraments were channels of grace and necessary food of the soul. They accompanied human life from the cradle to the grave. An infant was ushered into the world by the sacrament of Baptism while the dying were sent on their way out by the sacrament of Extreme Unction.While all the sacraments were important, the most essential were Baptism and the Eucharist.Baptism was thought to open the door to the Kingdom of Heaven by removing the stain of original sin. But that door to glory was only opened. The baptized needed to follow up their baptism as an infant with later sacraments like Confirmation, Marriage and others. So important was baptism, in an emergency, when an infant appeared to be in distress and a bishop wasn't close enough to perform the rite, the Church allowed the nearest available pious person to baptize.The Lord's Table, Communion, or as it's referred to by some churches, the Eucharist, was the sacrament of grace by which people nourished and nurtured their spirits and progressed in sanctification.Besides these, other rites were called sacraments, but until the time of the Scholastics, there was little agreement as to the proper number. Before the Scholastics, the number of sacraments varied from four to twelve.Bernard of Clairvaux listed ten and including foot-washing and the ordaining or as it was called, “investiture” of bishops and abbots. Abelard named only five. A mystic theologian named Hugo of St. Victor also gave five but went on to suggested thirty possible means by which the Church dispensed special grace. Hugo divided the sacraments into three classes,—First were the sacraments necessary for salvation; Baptism and the Eucharist.Second were those which sanctified the worshipper and made spiritual progress possible. This includes holy water and the use of ashes on Ash Wednesday.A third class prepared the way for the other sacraments.Though Thomas Aquinas listed seven sacraments, he recognized some of the lesser rites as quasi-sacramental in character.The uncertainty concerning the number of the sacraments was a heritage from the Church Fathers. Augustine defined any sacred rite as a sacrament. In 1179, the Third Lateran Council used the term in a wide sense to include the investiture of bishops and burial. The Catholic Church today makes a distinction between certain sacred rites, called sacramentalia, and the seven sacraments. Aquinas gave as the reason for the proper number to be seven—saying that three is the number of Deity, four of creation, and seven represents union of God and man. A rather interesting “reason” for the supreme Scholastic to make since it sounds far more like the work of one of the Mystics.Following the inquisitive nature of the Scholastics however, ingenious and elaborate attempts were made to correlate the seven sacraments to all the areas of mankind's spiritual need. They were understood as undoing the Fall and its effects.Seven corresponds to the seven classic virtues. Bonaventura allegorized the sacraments to a military career. He said the sacraments furnish grace for the spiritual struggle and strengthened the warrior on the various stages of his/her conflict. Baptism equips him on entering the conflict, confirmation encourages him in its progress, extreme unction helps him at the finish, the Eucharist and penance renew his strength, ordination introduces new recruits into the ranks, and marriage prepares men to be recruits. Augustine compared the sacraments to the badges and rank conferred upon a soldier, a comparison Thomas Aquinas adopted from him.By the authority of the well-regarded Peter the Lombard and Thomas Aquinas, seven was chosen as the sacred number. The seven sacraments are Baptism, Confirmation, Penance which includes confession and absolution, Eucharist, Marriage, Ordination, and Extreme Unction; sometimes called Last Rites.Confirmation was closely connected with baptism as a kind of supplement. It was a way for someone who'd been baptized as an infant to personally appropriate the faith of his/her parents by endorsing baptism as their own choice. They “confirmed” their faith in God and His Church. In the Greek Church, Confirmation can be performed by any priest, but in the Latin church, only by a bishop.Penance was deemed necessary for sins committed after Baptism and Confirmation. The penitent confessed his/her sins to a priest, who then prescribed certain acts that were understood to mark genuine repentance, such as praying the rosary or performing some compensatory act that rectified the error. Either upon completion of the penance, or in anticipation of its completion, the priest would announce the confessor absolved of the confessed sins. Being thus morally and spiritual clean the penitent was qualified to partake of the Eucharist.Ordination is the sacrament by which priests are authorized to their office.Marriage lies at the basis of the family and society in Church and State, and the rite of marriage was jealously guarded by the Church against any and all forces that would weaken it. The Church sanctioned marriage and it was to the Church one had to appeal to have a marriage annulled.In the Middle Ages, ordination and marriage were mutually exclusive. Since priests were to be celibate, they were ordained, and since lay people weren't ordained, they were provided the sacrament of marriage. The idea back of both was the sense of divine call and fitting to the role each was to play in the plan of God.Extreme unction was first mentioned as a sacrament in the Synod of Pavia in 850. Originally it was a special prayer for someone gravely ill. It was meant to replace the use of amulets and incantations and could be applied by both laymen and priests. Later, priests alone were permitted to offer it and it was only given to those about to die.The Scholastics taught that the effectiveness of the sacraments were ex opere operato, meaning that their virtue as channels of special grace were inherent in them and independent of the moral character of the priest or recipient. The only requirement was that they be performed in the proper manner with right intent.If this sounds familiar, you may remember the Donatist controversy that so incensed Augustine. The Donatists of North Africa insisted that Baptism and Communion, the only sacraments or ordinances they recognized, were invalid if performed by a derelict priest or unqualified bishop. Augustine upheld the idea that the sacraments carried inherent virtue. His ideas shaped the theological base of Sacramentalism.Thomas Aquinas said the sacrament imparts its virtue without the operation of faith on the part of the recipient. Protestant scholars have often claimed the Scholastics ascribed a magical virtue to the sacraments that was unaffected by the attitude of the recipient. But that's not really their view. Aquinas said it was the activity of God that made the sacrament efficacious, not the rite as divorced from Him. The Scholastics maintained Christ gave the Sacraments to the Church, to give to the people as a way to convey saving and sanctifying grace. Only the duly ordained church hierarchy of Pope, Cardinals, bishops and priests, possess the power to administer the sacraments. Under Sacramentalism, salvation is by Christ alone, but through the mediation of the Church.This is why and how the Medieval Church was able to exert such tight control over the lives of the people of Europe. They were the spiritual gatekeepers of heaven, declaring who was in and who was out.To the mediaeval mind, the sacraments were essential food of the religious life, and, in building up the sacramental system, the mediaeval theologian thought he was strengthening the Church. In the authority to administer them lay the power of the priesthood to open and shut the kingdom of heaven.Duns Scotus, whose opinions were set aside by the Church for those of Thomas Aquinas, insisted that God can confer grace apart from the sacraments, and their efficacy is dependent on the will of the recipient. Scotus said the sacraments acted indirectly. They weren't supernatural vehicles of saving or sanctifying grace. They were symbols used to affect a change of heart and mind in someone so an opening could be made for God's grace.The relation the priest sustains to the sacraments is a vital one, and except in extraordinary cases his administration of the rites is essential. As already said, their effectiveness doesn't depend upon the priest's personal character; it's only important that he perform them according to proper procedure. An immoral priest can confer sacramental grace. To use the mediaeval illustration, pure water may be conveyed through a lead pipe as well as thru a silver. The priest acts in the name of the Church, and in uttering the sacramental formula gives voice to the Christ-ordained authority of the Church. That's enough for bestowing a perfect sacrament.Bonaventura said that in the event of an emergency, when a sacrament was necessary but a priest wasn't available, the ritual could be performed by laymen outside the Church, IF the recipient then re-enacted the rite within the Church as soon as possible.Three of the sacraments; baptism, confirmation, and ordination, were thought to confer an indelible mark on the soul. Once baptized, always baptized. Once confirmed, forever confirmed. Once ordained, permanently ordained. However, in extreme cases, the state these marks ushered one into could be forfeited by becoming an apostate and being excommunicated.While Sacramentalism dominated the theology and practice of the Medieval Church, the Reformers set about to dismantle it. They claimed it was based on a faulty interpretation of Scripture. Martin Luther called Sacramentalism the Church's Babylonish captivity, in which the rights and liberty of believers were fettered by the traditions of men.In our next episode we'll take a look at another theological strain that operated at this time – The Medieval Mystics.As we end, I want to once more thank those who've donated to CS to help defray the cost of maintaining the site and server. Every bit helps.

This episode of CS is titled, “No Dunce Here.”The Franciscans had an answer to the Dominican Scholastic we looked at in the previous episode. In fact, Aquinas' Franciscan counterpart lived at the same time. His name was John Bonaventure.Born in Tuscany in 1221 as John Fidanza, he became known as Bonaventura when he had a miraculous recovery from a grave illness as a child of four. Upon regaining his health, his mother announced, “Bonaventura = Good fortune” and the name stuck.While Aquinas was predominantly a theologian, Bonaventure was both theologian and accomplished administrator in the affairs of the Franciscans. Where Thomas was precise but dry, John was a mystic given to great eloquence. If Aquinas was prose, Bonaventure was poetry.Bonaventure joined the Franciscans and immediately excelled in his studies. He spent 3 years in Paris studying under the Scholastic scholar Alexander of Hales. Alexander paid his pupil a huge compliment when he said that in Bonaventure, “Adam seems not to have sinned.”Finishing his studies in Paris, he stayed to teach, filling the spot of John of Parma when he took on the leadership of the Franciscans. He was only 26. Anyone would have been in over their head at that age since Bonaventure became the leader of the Franciscans when they ere being split by the fracture we talked about in an earlier episode. He took a middle position between the two parties and was able to negotiate an uneasy peace. It was a brutally hard assignment, but Bonaventure pulled it off with aplomb and earned the title of 2nd founder of the order.The entire idea of mendicancy came under assault during his term at the helm of the Franciscans. He penned a tract that silenced the opposition and reinforced support for the Mendicants.At the direction of the first Franciscan General Council at Narbonne in 1260, he wrote the Legend of Francis, the authoritative Franciscan account of the Order's founder.In 1273, he was made cardinal of Albano, Italy. He died in Lyons while attending a Church council in 1274. The Pope performed extreme unction for him and his funeral was attended by dignitaries from all over the Christian world. He was declared a “Doctor of the Church” in 1587, one of the highest honors the Roman Church can bestow.Dante, a fierce critic of sham religion, gave Bonaventure great honor by placing him beside Thomas Aquinas.These two will always be considered by students of history side by side. One historian of mediaeval theology calls them the illuminating stars on the horizon of the 13th C. Aquinas had the sharper mind, but Bonaventure the warmer heart. Maybe this is why each joined their respective orders; Thomas the Dominicans and John the Franciscans.Bonaventura enjoyed great popularity as a preacher. Being a poet, his sermons were far more eloquent than his peers.When Bonaventure wrote, like Aquinas, he turned his mind to theology and provided much to the cleaning up of the thoughts of the day. To give an idea of what kinds of things the Scholastics wrestled with, here are some of the topics Bonaventure weighed in on. . . .The Trinity, creation, sin, the Incarnation, grace, the Holy Spirit, sacraments, and the Afterlife. Having dealt with these basic topics he engaged a whole host of other subjects more popular to discuss. Things like . . .Could God have made a better world?Could He have made it sooner than He did?Can an angel be in several places at the same time?Can several angels be at the same time in the same place?At the moment of his creation was Lucifer corrupt?Did he belong to the order of angels?Is there a hierarchy among the fallen angels?Do demons have foreknowledge of contingent events? Bonaventure discussed whether or not sexual intercourse took place before the Fall, whether or not before the Fall men and women was equal, did Adam or Eve sin more grievously by eating the forbidden fruit.With such weighty and important stuff, no wonder these guys spent a good part of their time sitting at a desk, studying.Bonaventure agreed with Aquinas in denying that Mary was immaculately conceived and free of original sin. He disagreed with his fellow Franciscan, Duns Scotus, on the issue of transubstantiation. Though Scotus differed from Aquinas on precisely WHAT the bread and wine became, he did accept the idea they became something MORE than mere bread and wine, while Bonaventure held to a symbolic nature for the Communion elements.While Bonaventure was a brilliant mind, it's not his theology he's known for. It's hard to be when you live at the same time as Thomas Aquinas. He's best known as a mystic and the author of the Life of St. Francis.While Aquinas' Summa became the theological textbook of the Roman Church, it was Bonaventure's devotional writings that stirred the hearts of thousands of everyday priests to seek God by grace and through His Word.That brings us to another Franciscan and the last of the Scholastics we'll consider, John Duns [done] Scotus.Let me begin by saying that the Scotists, the followers of Duns Scotus, and the Thomists, who followed Aquinas, form the 2 great theological schools of the Middle Ages. The battle between them was fierce; at times violent.Now, I have to say that in reviewing Scotus' work, I have a difficult time grasping his thought. Being of only average intelligence, most of his work goes way over my head. Scotus was a serious brainiac and when I read him, I'm lost. I'll attempt a summary of his work later but first, let's take a look at his life. We can cover it quickly, because, well, we know next to nothing about him.He was born “John Duns [done]”; in Scotland; thus the Latin nickname “Scotus” by which he's best known. Scotus became a priest and joined the Franciscans. Most of his career was spent lecturing at Oxford. He eventually taught at Paris and Cologne where he died in 1308. A monument to Scotus in the Franciscan church at Cologne bears this inscription:—Scotia gave me birth, England nursed me, Gaul educated me, Cologne holds my ashes.Among the stories told of Duns Scotus is one that gives more insight into his thoughts than entire chapters of his complex written discourses.Scotus engaged an English farmer on the subject of religion. The conversation came round to predestination.  The farmer, who was sowing his field, said to Scotus: “Why do you speak to me? If God has foreknowledge that I will be saved, I will be saved whether I do good or ill.”Scotus replied: “Well, if God has foreknowledge that grain in your bag will grow out of this soil, it will grow whether you sow or withhold your hand. You may as well save yourself the labor you're at.”Scotus' mind was more critical than constructive. He tended to pick apart the thoughts and conclusions of others than to develop or declare his own positions. His work feels reactionary, though he was just using the dialectical method in fashion among the Scholastics.You'll remember that the great endeavor of the Scholastics was to link faith and reason; to show that faith wasn't ir-rational; it was super-rational. They aimed to show that the intellect was a tool to inform and strengthen faith, not weaken it.Scotus is regarded as last of the Scholastics because his work under-cut their endeavor. By using the questioning methodology of the dialectic, he attacked, not the sufficiency of faith as some scholastics had, he attacked the sufficiency of reason as the means to arrive at knowledge. He subjected Scholastic propositions to intense scrutiny. He showed how several of the theological propositions of the Church were difficult to support by reason, yet the Church said they were true. So, the problem had to be with reason, not with Church dogma. Some things had to be accepted, he said, by faith.Scotus' adeptness at asking questions that backed people into logical corners earned him both supporters and enemies. At times, his thoughts were so elaborate; his writing so confusing, today we refer to a muddle-headed person as a “dunce” a word derived from his name.Scotus spent much of his time on the subject of the will. It's his work on it that framed the philosophical base for the Reformers and their views on God's Sovereignty and Election.Scotus was the first major Catholic theologian to support the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. That says the mother of Jesus, though herself born of human parents, was conceived in holiness without the taint of original sin. That idea had been set forward a century earlier in France, where it immediately met with controversy. Scotus defended the view at a public debate in Paris, employing two-hundred lines of argument for its support and winning the university to his side. Although Aquinas rejected it, Scotus's view won the day. In Dec. 1854, Pope Pius IX, a Franciscan, declared the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception to be a divinely revealed fact and official Catholic dogma.Aquinas's reputation in philosophy and theology has eclipsed Scotus's, though Scotus's influenced a wide range of later thinkers, including in the 18th C German Protestant philosopher Leibniz and the 20th C French Catholic theologian Teilhard de Chardin. The Existentialism of the 20th C resurrected Scotus's emphasis on will over reason.If you take a college philosophy class today, most likely you'll be told that faith and reason are totally separate things. Reason, it's postulated, is based on evidence and the faculty of the mind. Faith is divorced from both reason and evidence; and reason, always trumps faith. This is an complete reversal from the Scholastics, who may be attributed with some of the loftiest moments in the long history of philosophical analysis. For them, faith came first, with reason a tool that helped fill out and bolster faith.Duns Scotus began the drift away from that by showing how untrustworthy reason could be. His goal was to remind Scholastics that in their emphasis on reason, they'd neglected the primacy of Faith. But in the divorce he postulated between faith and reason, what happened was that later thinkers ran with reason as separate and superior to faith. If Dun Scotus showed up at a college philosophy lecture today, he'd weep that his ideas had been so poorly developed. And he'd annihilate the shoddy thinking of the secular professor.

This 62nd episode of CS is the 5th and final in our look at monasticism in the Middle Ages.To a lesser extent for the Dominicans but a bit more for the Franciscans, monastic orders were an attempt to bring reform to the Western Church which during the Middle Ages had fallen far from the Apostolic ideal. The institutional Church had become little more than one more political body, with vast tracts of land, a massive hierarchy, a complex bureaucracy, and had accumulated powerful allies and enemies across Europe. The clergy and older orders had degenerated into an illiterate fraternity. Many priests and monks could neither read nor write, and engaged in gross immorality while hiding behind their vows.It wasn't this case everywhere. But it was in enough places that Francis was compelled to use poverty as a means of reform. The Franciscans who followed after Francis were quickly absorbed back into the Church's structure and the reforms Francis envisioned were still-born.Dominic wanted to return to the days when literacy and scholarship were part and parcel of clerical life. The Dominicans carried on his vision, but when they became prime agents of the Inquisition, they failed to balance truth with grace.Modern depictions of medieval monks often cast them in a stereo-typical role as either sinister agents of immorality, or bumbling fools with good hearts but soft heads. Sure there were some of each, but there were many thousands who were sincere followers of Jesus and did their best to represent Him.There's every reason to believe they lived quietly in monasteries and convents; prayed, read and engaged in humble manual labor throughout their lives. There were spiritual giants as well as thoroughly wicked and corrupt wretches.After Augustine of Canterbury brought the Faith to England it was as though the sun had come out.Another among God's champions was Malachi, whose story was recounted by Bernard of Clairvaux in the 12th C. Stories like his were one of the main attractions for medieval people who looked to the saints for reassurance some had managed to lead exemplary lives, and shown others how to.The requirement of sanctity was easy to stereotype. In the Life of St Erkenwald, we read that he was “perfect in wisdom, modest in conversation, vigilant in prayer, chaste in body, dedicated to holy reading, rooted in charity.” By the late 11th  C, it was even possible to hire a hagiographer, a writer of saintly-stories, such as Osbern of Canterbury, who would, for a fee, write a Life of a dead abbot or priest, in the hope he'd be canonized, that is – declared by the Church to be a saint.There was strong motive to do this.  Where there'd been a saint, a shrine sprang up, marking with a monument his/her monastery, house, bed, clothes and relics. All were much sought after as objects veneration. Pilgrimages were made to the saint's shrine. Money dropped in the ubiquitous moneybox. But it wasn't just a church or shrine that benefited. The entire town prospered. After all, pilgrims needed a place to stay, food to eat, souvenirs to take home proving they'd performed the pilgrimage and racked up spiritual points. Business boomed! So, hagiographers included a list of miracles the saint performed. These miracles were evidence of God's approval. There was competition between towns to see their abbot or priest canonized because it meant pilgrims flocking to their city.It was assumed that a holy man or woman left behind, in objects touched or places visited, a residual spiritual power, a ‘merit', which the less pious could acquire for assistance in their own troubles by going on pilgrimage and praying at the shrine. A similar power inhered in the body of the saint, or in parts of the body; fingernails or hair, which could conveniently be kept in ‘relic-holders' called reliquaries. People prayed near and touching them in the hope of a miracle, a healing, or help in some other urgent request of God.The balance between the active and the contemplative life was the core issue for those who aspired to be a genuine follower of Jesus and a good example to others. They struggled with the question of how much time should be given to God and how much to work in the world? From the Middle Ages, there comes no account of the enlightened idea the secular and religious could be merged into one overall passion for and service of God.In the medieval way of thinking, to be truly godly, a sequestered religious life was required. The idea that a blacksmith could worship God while working at his anvil was nowhere in sight. Francis came closest, but even he considered working for a wage and the call to glorify God mutually exclusive.  Francis urged work as part of the monk's life, but depended on charity for support. It wouldn't be till the Reformation that the idea of vocation liberated the sanctity of work.Because the cloistered, or sequestered religious life, was regarded as the only way to please God, many of the greats from the 4th C on supported monasticism. I list now some names who held this view, trusting if you've listened to the podcast for a while you'll recognize them . . .St. Anthony of Egypt, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Benedict of Nursia.In the Middle Ages the list is just as imposing. Anselm, Albertus Magnus, Bonaventura, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus, St. Bernard and Hugo de St. Victor, Eckart, Tauler, Hildegard, Joachim of Flore, Adam de St. Victor, Anthony of Padua, Bernardino of Siena, Berthold of Regensburg, Savonarola, and of course, Francis and Dominic.The Middle Ages were a favorable period for the development of monastic communities. The religious, political and economic forces at work across Europe conspired to make monastic life for both men and women a viable, even preferred, option. As is so often the case in movies and books depicting this period, sure there were some young men and women who balked at entering a monastery or convent when forced by parents, but there were far more who wanted to engage the sequestered life who were denied by parents.  When war decimated the male population and women outnumbered men by large margins, becoming a nun was the only way to survive. Young men who knew they weren't cut out for the hard labor of farm life or military service could always find a place to pursue their passion for learning in a monastery.As in most institutions, the fate of the brothers and sisters depended on the quality of their leader, the abbot or abbess. If she was a godly and effective leader, the convent thrived. If he was a tyrannical brute, the monastery shriveled.In those monasteries where scholarship prevailed, ancient manuscripts were preserved by scribes who laboriously copied them, and by doing so, became well-versed in the classics. It was from these intellectual safe-houses the Renaissance would eventually emerge.By drawing to themselves the best minds of the time, from the 10th well into the 13th C, monasteries were the nursery of piety and the centers of missionary and civilizing energy. When there was virtually no preaching taking place in churches, the monastic community preached powerful sermons by calling men's thoughts away from war and bloodshed to brotherhood and religious devotion. The motto of some monks was, “by the plough and the cross.” In other words, they were determined to build the Kingdom of God on Earth by preaching the Gospel and transforming the world by honest and hard, humble work.Monks were pioneers in the cultivation of the ground, and after the most scientific fashion then known, taught agriculture, the tending of vines and fish, the breeding of cattle, and the manufacture of wool. They built roads and some of the best buildings. In intellectual and artistic concerns, the convent was the main school of the times. It trained architects, painters, and sculptors. There the deep problems of theology and philosophy were studied; and when the universities arose, the convent furnished them with their first and most renowned teachers.So popular was the monastic life that religion seemed to be in danger of running out into monkery and society of being little more than a collection of convents. The 4th Lateran Council tried to counter this tendency by forbidding the establishment of new orders. But no council was ever more ignorant of the immediate future. Innocent III was scarcely in his grave before the Dominicans and Franciscans received full papal sanction.During the 11th and 12th Cs an important change came. All monks were ordained as priests. Before that time it was the exception for a monk to be a priest, which meant they weren't allowed to offer the sacraments. Once they were priests, they could.The monastic life was praised as the highest form of earthly existence. The convent was compared to The Promised Land and treated as the shortest and surest road to heaven. The secular life, even the life of the secular priest, was compared to Egypt. The passage to the cloister was called conversion, and monks were converts. They reached the Christian ideal.The monastic life was likened to the life of the angels. Bernard said to his fellow monks, “Are you not already like the angels of God, having abstained from marriage.”Even kings and princes desired to take the monastic vow and be clad in the monk's habit. So even though Frederick II was a bitter foe of the Pope as he neared his death, he changed into the robes of a Cistercian monk. Rogers II and III of Sicily, along with William of Nevers all dressed up in monks robes as their end drew near. They thought doing so would mean a better chance at heaven. Spiritual camouflage to get past Peter.Accounts from the time make miracles part and parcel of the monk's daily life. He was surrounded by spirits. Visions and revelations occurred day and night. Devils roamed about at all hours in the cloistered halls. They were on evil errands to deceive the unwary and shake the faith of the careless. Elaborate accounts of these encounters are given by Peter the Venerable in his work on Miracles. He gives a detailed account of how these restless spiritual foes pulled the bedclothes off sleeping monks and, chuckling, left them across the cloister.While monasteries and convents were a major part of life in Middle Age Europe, many of them bastions of piety and scholarship, others didn't live up to that rep and became blockades to progress. As the years marched forward, the monastic ideal of holiness degenerated into a mere form that became superstitious and suspicious of anything new. So while some monasteries served as mid-wives to the Renaissance others were like Herod's soldiers trying to slay it in its infancy.As we end, I thought it good to do a brief review of what are called “the hours, the Divine Office or the breviary.” This was how monks and nuns divided their day.The time for these divisions varied from place to place but generally it went like this.In the early morning before dawn, a bell was rung that awakened the monks or nuns to a time of private reading and meditation. Then they all gathered for Nocturns, in which a psalm was read, there was chanting, then some lessons form Scripture or the Church Fathers.After that they went back to bed for a bit, then got up at dawn for another service called Lauds. Lauds was followed by another period of personal reading and prayer, which resolved in the cloister again gathering for Prime at 6 AM.Prime was followed by a period of work, which ended with Terce, a time for group prayer at about 9.Then there's more work from about 10 to just before Noon, when the nuns and brothers gather for Sext, a short service where a few psalms are read. That's followed by the mid-day meal, a nap, another short service at about 3 PM called None, named for the 9th hour since dawn.Then comes a few hours of work, dinner about 5:50, and Vespers at 6 PM.After Vespers the nuns and monks have a time of personal, private prayers; regather for the brief service Compline, then hit the sack.Protestants and Evangelicals might wonder where the idea for the canonical hours came from. There's some evidence they derived from the practice of the Apostles, who as Jews, observed set times during the day for prayer. In Acts 10 we read how Peter prayed at the 6th hour. The Roman Centurion Cornelius, who'd adopted the Jewish faith, prayed at the 9th hour. In Acts 16, Paul and Silas worshipped at Midnight; though that may have been because they were in stocks in the Philippian jail. As early as the 5th C, Christians were using references in the Psalms as cues to pray in the morning, at mid-day and at midnight.

This episode of CS is titled Luther's Legacy.Long time subscribers to CS know that while the podcast isn't bias free, I do strive to treat subjects fairly. However, being a pastor of a non-denominational, evangelical Christian church in SoCal, I do have my views and opinions on the material we cover. When I share those opinions, I try to mark them as such. So >> Warning; Blatant opinion now ensues …We live in the Era of the Instant. People expect to have things quickly and relatively easily. Technology has produced an array of labor-saving devices that reduce once arduous tasks to effortless, “push a button and voila” procedures. Sadly, many assume such instantifying applies to the acquisition of knowledge as well. The internet enhances this expectation with ready access to on-line information, not just thru a desktop computer, but via smartphones where ever we are.And of course, if it's on the interwebs, it must be true.But knowledge and understanding are different things. Knowing a fact doesn't equal understanding a concept, truth or principle. And many people now want their history in condensed form. They don't really care to understand so much as to “get an A on the quiz” or, be able to answer trivia game questions. They can answer multiple choice but wouldn't have a clue how to write an essay.I say all this as we fill in some of our gaps on Martin Luther for two reasons.First – The very nature of this podcast, short snippets on Church history, can easily foster a cavalier attitude toward our subject. So I need to make a MASSIVE qualifier and say that if all someone listens to is CS, they must never, ever assume they know Church History. My entire aim is to give those who listen reference points, a broad sweep of history with just enough detail to spark your embarking on your own journey of studying this fascinating subject. Pick one era, maybe just 1st C, and one region, then study everything you can find about it. Become an expert on that one span of history. Press in past the dates and people and places, seeking to truly understand. Then use that to expand your study either backward or forward in time.Second – When we think of someone like Martin Luther, we tend to make him an index for a certain idea or movement. “Martin Luther: Father of the Reformation.” The problem with this is that we then tend to assume Luther was born with the intent of breaking away from the Roman church, as our last 2 episodes have shown was not at all the case. The evolution of Luther's thoughts was an amazing microcosm of what was happening in at least hundreds, and probably thousands of people at that time. He just happened to be positioned as the lightening rod of change.In this episode, I want to fill in some of the gaps the previous couple episodes left because of our time-limited routine here on CS. What follows is a bit of a hodge-podge meant to provide a little more context for understanding Luther and how he came to the ideas he articulated and millions ended up embracing.Martin Luther ranks as one of the most influential figures of the last thousand years. While Marco Polo and Columbus opened new lands, Shakespeare and Michelangelo produced some of the most sublime art, and Napoleon and Stalin changed the political face of their times, Luther triggered a change in the human spirit that's reached billions all around the world. The ideas announced in his sermons and written in books have affected virtually every realm and sphere of human activity, from politics to art, work to leisure. Truth be told, Luther's main body of work was a conscious part of the early American character and continued to play a central role until recently. It was Luther who played wet-nurse to the Modern world's emergence from Medievalism. We can neither credit nor blame Luther for the whole of what eventually became Protestantism, but as one who played a critical role in the emergence of a new movement and a new way of life for millions of people, the influence of his actions and beliefs on the past 500 years is beyond calculating. The modern world can barely be understood without Luther and the Reformation he sparked.Once Martin Luther was ordained a priest and settled into his ministry at Erfurt, his    superiors in the Augustinian order decided he should continue with his theological studies. Having gained a Master of Arts, he was qualified to lecture on philosophy. But he knew he needed more study to qualify as a lecturer on the Bible.The first step toward that end was to lecture on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, a standard theology textbook of the Middle Ages, which collected extracts from Scripture and the early church Fathers, arranged under topical headings to enhance discussion of theological issues. Under the guidance of Johann Nathin, a Professor of Theology and a senior member of Luther's order, Luther set to work studying texts such as Gabriel Biel's Dogmatics, a commentary on Lombard's Sentences. Luther devoured Lombard's theology.Meanwhile, Johann von Staupitz had been involved with the German Prince and Elector, Frederick the Wise, in establishing a new university in a small town called Wittenberg, 100 miles NW of Erfurt. In the Winter of 1508–9, he invited Luther to move and teach there. Staupitz was himself Lecturer in Biblical Studies in Wittenberg, so the idea was for Luther to help with the teaching of Aristotle's Ethics. At the same time, he would work towards his doctorate, the ultimate qualification to teach theology in the church and university. After a single term, he was recalled to Erfurt for a further two years to fill a gap in the teaching program, but eventually returned to Wittenberg in 1512. Luther was placed in charge of  teaching younger Augustinian friars in the order's house in town. He received his doctorate in mid-October and enrolled as a full teaching member of the university.These years also saw the growth of Luther's profile within the Augustinian Order. In 1510, he was sent with a fellow friar to Rome to try to sort out a complex internal matter connected with the order. They assumed his training as a lawyer positioned him as perfect for the job. The trip proved unsuccessful, but it was Luther's only trip outside Germany.The Modern and mostly uninformed view of the Middle Ages is that it was a time when the people of Europe assumed they knew everything, and that the everything they knew was colossally wrong. But we Moderns NOW know è WE know everything. Ha!It does not take much investigation to realize this image of medieval thought is far from true. Erfurt, like most German universities of the time, was a place of wide theological variety. For several centuries, theology in the universities of Europe had been dominated by The Scholastics.By the time Luther came on the scene, there were three main types of Scholastic theology in operation. The first two, following the teaching of Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus were by then known as the ‘old way' or Realists. Alongside this was emerging a new kind of theology, called the ‘modern way', o r Nominalists.One central question medieval theologians often pondered concerned the parts played by God and humans in salvation. The question of how we can come into a right relationship with God or, as the theologians called it, the doctrine of justification, was a hot topic. Contrary to what we might think, no one in late-medieval theological circles believed that a person could earn salvation purely by their own efforts. All agreed that God's grace was necessary for salvation. The point at issue was how much and what kind of help was needed, and what part people played in the process. The Church's teaching on this question was far from clear, and a number of different positions were held, not least among the Nominalist faction.One group took their cue from the great 5th C Bishop of Hippo, St Augustine.  When it came to the doctrine of justification, they held that humanity was helpless. Only God himself, by his sovereign mercy, could intervene and save people. Another group of Nominalists, the group that had an early influence on Luther, such as William of Ockham and Gabriel Biel, thought there was something which could be done to initiate the process of salvation.When Luther read Biel's textbook, he was persuaded by the idea that God has entered into a covenant, or pact, with humanity. If the sinner did what lay within him, then God would not deny him grace. Within the framework of this agreement or covenant, sinners were capable of making a small moral effort on their own, without the help of God's grace. This initial effort was required before God would respond. This might involve feeling a genuine sorrow for sin, or generating a sense of love for God. In response to this, God would give a supply (‘infusion' was the technical term) of His grace to help fan this spark into a flame. But this initial gift of grace was not enough to access salvation on its own. The Christian then had to cooperate with God's grace and, by the exercise of good works done with God's help, perfect this contrition for sin and love for God, so that salvation could truly be attained.At the same time one group of Nominalists was scratching this out, another movement with its origins a Century earlier scorned all these movements within scholastic thought. The Renaissance, which had begun in Northern Italy, spread into Germany. It captured the allegiance of many younger scholars, with its exciting promise of returning to the sources of classical Greece and Rome as a model for literature, art, architecture, law and rhetoric.‘Humanism,' as this program was known, isn't to be confused with modern humanism, that is, secular humanism, which is atheistic. While it did have a high view of human dignity, the 16th C version was religious in character, something most colleges and universities today neglect to mention. Renaissance humanism, or the study of the humanities wasn't so much a set of ideas or philosophical opinions, as a yearning for all things classical. The great motivating desire was to acquire eloquence and skill with words and language. So, everything was devoted towards a new kind of education, which involved making the study of classical texts possible—as these were thought the best models of eloquence available. These texts could be Greek literature, Roman law, classical poetry or early Christian theology. So, the humanists promoted the study of Greek and Hebrew, alongside Latin, the language of all scholarly work in the Middle Ages, so that these texts could be read in the original, avoiding what they felt was the misleading filter of medieval translations.Humanists took particular exception to the methods and products of scholastic theology, of every stripe, Nominalist or Realist. They felt that the scholastic method encouraged the asking and answering of a series of irrelevant questions. They also objected to the method of using medieval commentaries, rather than the original texts themselves. For the humanist, lengthy medieval interpretations simply got in the way of the brilliance of the original authors. Humanists wanted a direct encounter with the original text of classical authors, the Bible and the Fathers, rather than have all that muddied by an extra layer of explanations made by lesser, more recent scholars, writing in crude and verbose medieval Latin.So, using the recent invention of the printing press, humanists reproduced of a whole series of ancient Christian texts, which made a new kind of scholarship possible. Three works in particular were important.First, in 1503, Erasmus published the Enchiridion or Handbook of the Christian Soldier. It laid out a program of reform for the Church.Second, in 1506, an 11-volume edition of the Works of Augustine appeared. For the first time in centuries, it was possible to read the greatest authority in Western theology in full, in context, and without the help of medieval commentators.Third, and most important was Erasmus's greatest achievement, his Greek New Testament published in 1516. Although this edition was not as reliable as it might have been since Erasmus had a limited number of texts to work from—it became the first-ever printed edition of the Greek text, so that, for the first time, theologians all over Europe had the chance to compare the standard Latin Bible text with the original. A number of disturbing things emerged. For example, medieval theologians were unanimous in seeing marriage as a full sacrament of the church, alongside holy communion and baptism, on the basis of Jerome's translation of Ephesians 5:32, which referred to it as a sacrament. When Erasmus's edition appeared, it became clear that the original Greek word really meant ‘mystery'. The scriptural basis for regarding marriage as equal in value to baptism and Communion was shaken. So, the work of Erasmus and the other humanists played a major part in loosening the hold of the church's authority in the minds of many educated laypeople.While they didn't engage in outright warfare, scholasticism and humanism jostled in the lecture halls and universities across Germany in the early years of the 16th C. Erfurt where Luther was, was no exception. The two schools of thought were both present in the university, although relationships between them were, on the whole, fairly amiable. Luther was known for his knowledge of classical writers. He likely attended lectures by humanist teachers.This was the theological landscape at the time Luther's mind was being formed. Taught theology by nominalists, Luther believed as long as he did his best, God would give him grace to help him to become better. Humanist texts allowed him to study the great authorities of the Bible and the Fathers with fresh eyes. From 1509–10, he studied Augustine's works and Lombard's Sentences, and some of the notes he made in the margins of these works have survived to this day. They show him to be a not particularly original adherent of the theology of the Modern Way. He'd followed his teachers well, and there was little sign at this stage of departure from them.Luther was often plagued by bouts of depression. He wondered whether God really did hold good intentions towards him, sensing rather the stern stare of Christ as judge, demanding from him an impossible level of purity. He wondered whether these feelings were evidence he wasn't chosen at all, but that he was among those destined to be damned to eternal suffering.On the shelves of the library of the Augustinian friary in Erfurt were copies of several works by Bernard of Clairvaux. Bernard was something of a hero to monks like Luther, having developed a rich spiritual theology in the 12th C, and lots of advice on the spiritual life. Luther read these and heard them read over meals. He noticed Bernard's close attention to Scripture, and a piety which kept returning to the sufferings and humility of Jesus. Bernard advised his readers to meditate on the cross of Christ, especially when anxious or depressed. One of the virtues gained from such meditation was humility, a virtue greatly valued by God. Bernard said humility's abiding image was the crucified Christ, and how God used the experience of suffering, even seasons of doubt, to bring humility to the human soul. à This was a tonic to the oft-tormented Luther.This emphasis on the Scriptures and pondering the cross, passed on by earlier scholars like Bernard and Augustine plowed and planted the field of Luther's mind for the fruit it would later produce in the central doctrine of the Reformation – Justification by Faith Alone.A recent biographer called Martin Luther “A catastrophe in the history of Western civilization.” If we look only at the religious wars which were part of the Reformation, that verdict seems fair. But if we widen the criteria of our evaluation to Luther's role in calling the church to a simpler, more just and communal vision, in puncturing the conceited abuse of power and hierarchical oppression of a moribund institution which nearly all admit was grotesquely corrupt, not to mention the inspiration which his theology has been to countless people over the centuries since, that judgment isn't fair.Luther was a man of immense personal courage, fierce intelligence, and furious stubbornness. A mind steeped in the theology of his time, an ability to see quickly to the heart of an issue, and an eloquence that enabled him to express his ideas with clarity, was a powerful mixture. He inspired deep loyalty, even ardent love on the part of his supporters. He had a capacity to enjoy life in a huge way. He could be both tender and sharp, and his absence left an irreplaceable gap. As Melanchthon put it at Luther's funeral, now they were ‘entirely poor, wretched, forsaken, orphans who had lost a dear noble man as our father'. At the same time, Luther was a man with deep flaws, who made enemies as quickly as friends, and whose brilliant language could be used to hurt as much as to heal.As we end this episode, I wanted to share something I found that I thought was really good in regards to Luther's Enduring Legacy. It has to do with his doctrine of Justification by Faith. These thoughts are sparked by Graham Tomlin's Luther and His World.Our Postmodern culture isn't concerned with the same questions that dominated the 16th C. People today don't agonize, as Luther did, over where to find a gracious God. Modern men and women aren't in the least bit concerned about the demands of a whole series of religious rules. But they do experience the constant demand to live up to standards of beauty set by the glamour industry; to levels of achievement set by business targets, or to standards of talent set by entertainment and sports. How to understand the self is a persistent and difficult problem modern psychotherapy aims to ameliorate.While Luther obviously worked before the development psychology, his doctrine of justification by faith has something to say to modern man. It says that human worth lies not in any ability or quality we possess, but in the simple fact that we are loved by our Creator.At the Heidelberg Disputation of 1518, Luther claimed: “Sinners are attractive because they are loved, not loved because they are attractive.” He used to say that our value lies not inside us, but outside us; in Christ himself. The righteousness of the Christian, in which he/she stands before God, is not their own righteousness, but is Christ's own righteousness, received by faith. They can know their true value is found not in any good quality in themselves, nor any good actions they've performed, but in the fact they're loved by God. Luther's location of value entirely ‘outside ourselves', in God's love manifested in Christ, safeguards a sense that our worth is unshakeable. Whether in work or unemployed, able-bodied or disabled; red or yellow, black or white we're ALL precious in God's sight. Even if we experience doubt over our worth through despair at our own capabilities, virtue or reputation, this sense of ultimate value cannot be taken away and can become the foundation of a secure and steady self-image because it's received rather than achieved.But there's more and this is where the doctrine of justification by faith can touch and heal our shattered world. The doctrine reverses the way in which we tend to evaluate other people. If a person's value lies in a quality or feature which they possess, such as a particular skill or ability or ethnicity, it can make distinctions between people. Some people are more valuable and some are less; and we're back to Apartheid, slavery, and the Holocaust. If, however, as justification by faith insists, a person's true value lies not in anything they possess but in something ‘outside themselves'; that they are loved by God—then we can't make such distinctions. Each person has dignity and value, and deserves equal treatment, regardless of age, skills, social utility or earning capacity.The Biblical Doctrine of Justification by Faith utterly upends Critical Theory which carves people into groups and sets worth solely by their identity IN that group. For the Biblical truth of Salvation by Grace through Faith resets human identity in only two groups; the lost and saved = Both of which are loved eternally by God, a love made manifest in the Cross of Christ.There is, however, at the same time a sobering honesty about Luther's doctrine of justification. He insists that the first step to wisdom, to a rock-solid, immovable sense of self-worth, is to take a good look into the depths of one's own soul. It means to face up honestly to the self-centeredness, lack of love for one's neighbor, cowardice and indifference towards those who are suffering that lurks there. This is no easy doctrine which glosses over the reality of sin and evil in the human heart, the capacity to inflict pain and injustice which lies in everyone. For Luther, God has to help us to look into this abyss before we can go any further. This is far from that pleasant middle-class religion which assumes that everyone is good and nice, and which refuses to look beneath the surface. Luther's God insists on facing up to the dark secrets inside, the selfish motivations and hidden desires.But this is only preliminary. Some forms of religion have implied that this is the sum of religion—making us feel bad about ourselves. Luther insists this is merely a necessary first step—a means to an end, but not an end in itself. God breaks up the fragile foundations of a sense of self-worth based in our own virtues, in order to establish a much firmer rock upon which to build. Luther would have been wary of psychological techniques which try to build self-worth by positive thinking and self-talk.Justification by faith is a reminder to Christians that they approach God not on the basis of who they are, but on the basis of who Christ is. Self-worth, value and forgiveness are gifts, not rights. It's nothing to do with achieving an elusive goal of becoming the idealized person they might like to be in their most hopeful moments. It is a reminder that it is only when they stop trying to be someone else, and start being honest about who they really are, that they can begin to receive God's acceptance of them à In Christ.It doesn't get any more Biblical than that!

This episode is titled – Monk Business Part 2In the early 13th C a couple new monastic orders of preaching monks sprang up known as the Mendicants. They were the Franciscans and Dominicans.The Franciscans were founded by Francis of Assisi. They concentrated on preaching to ordinary Christians, seeking to renew basic, Spirit-led discipleship. The mission of the Dominicans aimed at confronting heretics and aberrant ideas.The Dominicans were approved by the Pope as an official, church sponsored movement in 1216, the Franciscans received Papal endorsement 7 years later.They quickly gained the respect of scholars, princes, and popes, along with high regard by the masses. Their fine early reputation is counterbalanced by the idleness, ignorance, and in some cases, infamy, of their later history.To be a Mendicant meant to rely on charity for support. A salary or wage isn't paid by the church to support mendicant monks.The appearance of these two mendicant orders was one of the most significant events of the Middle Ages, and marks one of the notable revivals in the history of the Christian Church. They were the Salvation Army of the 13th C. At a time when the spirit of the Crusades was waning and heresies threatened authority, Francis d'Assisi and Dominic de Guzman, an Italian and a Spaniard, united in reviving the spirit of the Western Church. They started monasticism on a new path. They embodied Christian philanthropy; the sociological reformers of their age. The orders they birthed supplied the new universities and study of theology with some of their most brilliant lights.Two temperaments could scarcely have differed more widely than the temperaments of Francis and Dominic. The poet Dante described Francis as a Flame, igniting the world with love; Dominic he said, was a Light, illuminating the world.Francis is the most unpretentious, gentle, and lovable of all greats of monastic life.Dominic was, to put it bluntly à cold, systematic, and austere.Francis was greater than the order that sought to embody his ways.The Dominicans became greater than their master by taking his rules and building on them.Francis was like one of the apostles; Dominic a later and lesser leader.When you think of Francis, see him mingling with people or walking through a field, barefoot so his toes can feel the soil and grass. Dominic belongs in a study, surrounded by books, or in court pleading a case.Francis' lifework was to save souls. Dominic's was to defend the Church. Francis has been celebrated for his humility and gentleness; Dominic was called the “Hammer of heretics.”The two leaders probable met at least thre times. In 1217, they were both at Rome, and the Vatican proposed the union of the two orders into one organization. Dominic asked Francis for his cord, and bound himself with it, saying he desired the two to be one. A year later they again met at Francis' church in Assisi, and on the basis of what he saw, Dominic decided to embrace mendicancy, which the Dominicans adopted in 1220. In 1221, Dominic and Francis again met at Rome, when a powerful Cardinal tried to wrest control of the orders.Neither Francis nor Dominic wanted to reform existing monastic orders. At first, Francis had no intention of founding an order. He simply wanted to start a more organic movement of Christians to transform the world. Both Dominic and Francis sought to return the church to the simplicity and dynamic of Apostolic times.Their orders differed from the older monastic orders in several ways.First was their commitment to poverty. Dependence on charity was a primary commitment. Both forbade the possession of property. Not only did the individual monk pledge poverty, the entire order did as well.  You may remember from our last episode this was a major turn-around from nearly all the previous monastic orders, who while the individual monks were pledged to poverty, their houses could become quite wealthy and plush.The second feature was their devotion to practical activities in society. Previous monks had fled for solitude to the monastery. The Black and Gray Friars, as the Dominicans and Franciscans were called from the colors of their habits, gave themselves to the service of a needy world. To solitary contemplation they added immersion in the marketplace. Unlike some of the previous orders, they weren't consumed with warring against their own flesh. They turned their attention to battling the effects of evil on the world. They preached to the common people. They relieved poverty. They listened to and sought to redress the complaints of the oppressed.A third characteristic of the orders was that lay brotherhoods developed à a 3rd order, called the Tertiaries.  These were lay men and women who, while pursuing their usual vocations, were bound by oath to practice the virtues of the Christian life.Some Christians will hear this and say, “Wait – isn't that what all genuine followers in Christ are supposed to do– follow Jesus obediently while being employed as a mechanic, student, salesman, engineer school-teacher or whatever?”Indeed! But keep in mind that the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith, and living the Christian life by the power of the Spirit had been submerged under a lot of religion and ritual. It took the Reformation, three centuries later to clear away the ritualistic crust and restore the Gospel of Grace. In the 13th C, most people thought living a life that really pleased God meant being a monk, nun or priest. Lay brotherhood was a way for someone to in effect say – “My station in life doesn't allow me to live a cloistered life; but if I could, I would.” Many, probably most believed they were hopelessly sinful, but that by giving to their priest or supporting the local monastery, the full-time religious guys could rack up a surplus of godliness they could draw on to cover them. The church facilitated this mindset. The message wasn't explicit but implied was, “You go on and muddle through your helplessness, but if you support the church and her priests and monks, we'll be able to pray for your sorry soul and do works of kindness God will bless, then we'll extend our covering over you.”On an aside, while that sounds absurd to many today, don't in fact many repeat this? Don't they fall to the same error when a husband hopes his believing wife is religious enough for the both of them? Or when a teenager assumes his family's years of going to church will somehow reserve his/her spot in heaven? Salvation on the family-plan.Lay brotherhood was a way for commoners to say, “Yeah, I don't really buy that surrogate-holiness thing. I think God wants ME to follow Him and not trust someone else's faith.”A fourth feature was monks activity as teachers in the universities. They recognized these new centers of education held a powerful influence, and adapted themselves to the situation.While the Dominicans were quick to enter the universities, the Franciscans lagged. They did so because Francis had resisted learning. He was a bit of an anti-intellectualist. He was because he'd seen way too much of the scholarship of priests who ignored the poor. So he said things like, “Knowledge puffs up, but charity edifies.”To a novice he said, “If you have a songbook you'll want a prayer-book; and if you have a prayer-book, you'll sit on a high chair like a prelate, and say to your brother, 'Bring me my prayer-book.' ” To another he said, “The time of tribulation will come when books will be useless and be thrown away.”While this was Francis' attitude toward academics, his successors among the Franciscans built schools and became sought after as professors in places like the University of Paris. The Dominicans led the way, and established themselves early at the seats of the two great continental universities, Paris and Bologna.At Paris, Oxford, and Cologne, as well as a few other universities, they furnished the greatest of the Academics. Thomas Aquinas, Albertus Magnus, and Durandus, were Dominicans; John of St. Giles, Alexander Hales, Adam Marsh, Bonaventura, Duns Scotus, Ockham, and Roger Bacon were all Franciscans.The fifth notable feature of the Mendicant orders was their quick approval by the Pope. The Franciscans and Dominicans were the first monastic bodies to vow allegiance directly to him. No bishop, abbot, or general chapter intervened between order and Pope. The two orders became his bodyguard and proved themselves to be a bulwark of the papacy. The Pope had never had such organized support before. They helped him establish his authority over bishops. Wherever they went, which was everywhere in Europe, they made it their business to establish the principle of the Vatican's supremacy over princes and realms.The Franciscans and Dominicans became the enforcement arm for doctrinal orthodoxy. They excelled all others in hunting down and rooting out heretics. In Southern France, they wiped out heresy with a river of blood. They were the leading instruments of the Inquisition. Torquemada was a Dominican.  As early as 1232, Gregory IX officially authorized the Dominicans to carry out the Inquisition. And in a move that had to send Francis spinning at top speed in his burial plot, the Franciscans demanded the Pope grant them a share in the gruesome work. Under the lead of Duns Scotus they became champions of the doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary.The rapid growth of the orders in number and influence was accompanied by bitter rivalry. The disputes between them were so violent that in 1255 their generals had to call on their monks to stop fighting. Each order was constantly jealous that the other enjoyed more favor with the pope than itself.It's sad to see how quickly the humility of Francis and the desire for truth in Dominic was set aside by the orders they gave rise to. Because of the papal favor they enjoyed, monks of both orders began to intrude into every parish and church, incurring the hostility of the clergy whose rights they usurped. They began doing specifically priestly services, things monks were not authorized to do, like hearing confession, granting absolution, and serving Communion.Though they'd begun as reform movements, they soon delayed reformation. They degenerated into obstinate obstructers of progress in theology and civilization. From being the advocates of learning, they became props to ignorance. The virtue of poverty was naught but a veneer for a vulgar and indolent insolence.These changes set in long before the end of the 13th C, the same century the Franciscans and Dominicans had their birth. Bishops opposed them. The secular clergy complained of them. Universities ridiculed and denounced them for their mock piety and abundant vices. They were compared to the Pharisees and Scribes. They were declaimed as hypocrites that bishops were urged to purge from their dioceses. Cardinals and princes repeatedly appealed to popes to end their intrusions into church affairs, but usually the popes were on the Mendicant's side.In the 15th C, one well-known teacher listed the four great persecutors of the Church; tyrants, heretics, antichrist, and the Mendicants.All of this is a sorry come-down from the lofty beginnings of their founders.We'll take the next couple episodes to go into a bit more depth on these two leaders and the orders they founded.As we end this episode, I want to again say thanks to all those listeners and subscribers who've “liked” and left comments on the CS FB page.I'd also like to say how appreciative I am to those who've gone to the iTunes subscription page for CS and left a positive review. Any donation to CS is appreciated.

One of the features of Church History is the tendency for the theological pendulum to swing to one extreme, then back in the other direction to another. At the risk of being simplistic but in an attempt to keep it brief, let me condense things like this . . .The theological discussion of the early church struggled first with how to understand Jesus and His place in the Godhead; His identity as both God and Man and how both the Son and Holy Spirit related to the Father in the Trinity. Nailing that down with just the right terminology, they then dove deeper into Who Jesus was, seeking to understand how his identity as both God and Man related to each other. All that was the subject & theological fodder for the first great Church Councils and their Creeds that have for the most part come to define Christian Orthodoxy.But theologians didn't all then hang up their scholarly hats and sail off to a tropical isle to lounge in beach chairs and sip fruit drinks with little umbrellas. They kept on theologizing; and theologizing and then theologizing some more. They made a list of all the things people wondered about related to the faith and went in search of answers. When they ran out of questions, they started making new ones up about things people had NOT been wondering over – like, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? And, why would an angel WANT to dance on a pin's head? How big should a pin's head be? à You get the idea.This period of theology began in the 12th C as a part of Medieval Theology and is known as Scholasticism. Some of the names associated with Scholasticism are Anselm, Abelard, Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, and the Big Daddy of them all Thomas Aquinas who lived during the 13th C.The problem with Scholasticism is that it became a purely academic movement that appealed only to intellectuals. Theology became the realm and prerogative of an elite class of highly educated academics. Gone were the days when theology touched the lives of the common people and informed them about their relationship with God. PRACTICAL theology was set aside in favor of theoretical ponderings on philosophical details. Commoners were too busy trying to survive to pay attention to all that. The Middle Ages in Europe saw a growing disconnect between theology and the common man. Priests, who'd been the interface between the workaday world and the Church, were torn between competing pulls. One pull was the desire to minister to commoners with their needs, pedantic & mundane as they often were. The other attraction was the desire to be honored among their theological peers as a learned & erudite man of the cloth. While some priests eschewed the later appeal in favor of keeping it simple and ministering to the needs of common people, many others succumbed to the draw of the hallowed halls of academia and Scholasticism.The result was that path leading to a moribund church needing renewal and reform we looked at in Season 1 in the series “The Long Road to Reform.”So the theological pendulum swung in Scholasticism way out toward a purely academic philosophizing. Then in the Reformation swung back toward Scripture as the basis of Faith and practice. But the Reformation didn't produce a single brand of Protestantism; it launched a bunch. Each of them took on the task of justifying itself as the right one; most faithful to Scripture. Reformation theologians embarked on a kind of Protestant Scholasticism; at first producing pamphlets, then books and finally several volumes defending their views and attacking others. Polemics, that is works attacking other positions were frequent among Protestant theologians after the Reformation. A polemic became the cause of a reply, which itself would turn to a polemic, which would call up more responses. It was a War of Words & Ideas. Fought with the ammunition of paper & ink, and eventually, with real swords and spears and cannons as lines were drawn and being a heretic became just cause for killing.Just as Catholic Scholasticism helped paved the way for the Reformation, it was inevitable Protestant Scholasticism would prompt its own Response. It came in what's called Pietism, regarded by some as the most important movement between the Refor­mation and theological liberalism.The first stirrings occurred among Calvinists in the late 16th & 17th C in the Northern European reaches of the Netherlands & Germany mainly among Lutherans. It's main leaders were German Lutherans; Philipp Spener, August Francke, and Nikolaus von Zinzendorf. It was picked up and carried along by John and Charles Wesley, founders of Methodism.By the middle of the 17th C, Protestant dogmaticians defined the fundamentals of saving faith in such elaborate detail no one but an advanced scholar could hope to know them. Theology, which the Early Reformers delighted to return to the common man was once again being sequestered in the skulls of academics. Luther used theology to reform public morality in Wittenberg. Calvin did the same far more systematically in Geneva. Both had the support of the State & a large part of the population. But by the end of the C, it looked like the Reformation had stalled. With rare exception, both nobility & commoners were as immoral as before the Reformation.What came eventually to be called Pietism began simply as several uncoordinated efforts on the part of pastors to get their people to live out what they claimed to believe. There was no thought among these church leaders to start a movement and give it a distinctive label people would write books and do podcasts on hundreds of years later. They didn't think of it as “Pietism;” they considered it normal Christianity – Following Jesus.A forerunner of Pietism was John Arndt. Arndt resisted the trend of his day for pastors to pursue heady theology & advocated instead an intense pursuit of a personal, real, warm relationship with Christ. It wasn't that Arndt rejected theological educations and discussions. It's just that he felt they'd become a substitute for a genuine walk with God. His ideas quickly took root and moved other pastors to a similar message.The first Pietists regarded themselves, not as in­novators, but as heirs of Luther. They weren't launching some new movement; they were getting back to Martin. Pietism did develop distinctive emphases that set it apart from the emerging Lutheran orthodoxy. By far its most important emphasis was its belief in each Christian having a conversion experience in which they were born again. Pietists believed they had more than sufficient warrant for this in what Jesus said to Nicodemus in John 3 – “You must be born again.” That was NOT an emphasis in standard Lutheranism.Pietism was intensely personal. It urged people to take their commitments as a sacred oath & obligation. In so doing, it made them better members of society and so came to the attention of civil rulers as a useful tool. So it was encouraged.Pietism never became an established church or denomination. Rather, it was a movement that infiltrated most of the Protestant groups of Europe and aboard. It was the Pietistic urge to walk humbly with God that launched may of the distinctives that have marked a vibrant Evangelical Faith. Things like Bible printing and distribution, foreign missions, orphanages & schools, hospitals & ministries for the disabled & elderly. Pietists did all they could to fulfill the commandments to love God & others, and to carry the Gospel to the lost.But, and here's where the swinging pendulum ran too far with the Pietistic reaction to Protestant Scholasticism—In the move to prove true faith changes lives, some Pietists embraced the slogan “Life, not doctrine.” Instead of a balanced Both/And, they advocated an Either/Or that pitted theology against behavior.Orthodoxy & Orthopraxy were divorced.This indifference to doctrine saw Pietism becoming an unwitting ally to the Enlighten-ment's attack on the Central Truth claims of Orthodox Christianity. Then it helped fuel the sentimentalism of the Enlightenment's own pendulum swing into Romanticism.With Pietism's emphasis on the individual experience of conversion and a personal walk with God, the sense of Christian Community took a massive hit as well. Jesus wasn't just the Savior of the world, He was now a PERSONAL Savior; the Savior of ME, rather than US. So, one of The Gospel's greatest attractions, the priority & reality of restored love for God and others that had been so appealing since the first days of the Church, was diluted. Under a maturing Pietism, Christianity went from being a Faith that called people into community through a mutually shared life, to more of an individualistic focus on one's personal experience of conversion & a daily walk with God.A thoughtful reflection on modern Evangelicalism, especially as evidenced in North America, reveals the many connections to Pietism.  Many, maybe most, independent Protestant churches are thoroughly pietistic. Much of crusade-style evangelism flows from the pietistic urge to promote a conversion experience.So, some might ask – Why are we talking about Pietism in a series on Heretics and Heresy?Good question.Pietism itself isn't heretical, not even close. But its history reveals an important truth the wise will glean. In emphasizing one thing, there's the tendency to de-emphasize another. When balance is lost to the swinging pendulum of trends in human society, a door is opened to errors that can do great harm.Pietism's emphasis on personal conversion and the individual's walk with God became an unwitting ally to the Enlightenment's assault on historic, orthodox Christianity. It helped pre-position hundreds of thousands for the sentimentality, emotionalism, and anti-intellectualism of Romanticism.Pietism is one of many reminders that a good thing can become a bad thing when it's not carefully made to be a balanced thing.

Wed, 1 Jan 1964 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7744/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7744/1/7744.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1964): Das Gottesbild und die Rechtfertigung in der Schultheologie zwischen Duns Scotus und Luther. In: Wissenschaft und Weisheit, Vol. 27: pp. 197-210. K

Tue, 1 Jan 1963 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7737/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7737/1/7737.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1963): Die Entwicklung der Akzeptations- und Verdienstlehre von Duns Scotus bis Luther. mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Franziskanertheologen. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters; Bd. 40. Münster, Westfalen: Aschendorff Katholische T

Thu, 1 Jan 1959 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7743/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7743/1/7743.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1959): Die Geistigkeit des hl. Franziskus in der Christologie des Johannes Duns Scotus. In: Wissenschaft und Weisheit, Vol. 22: pp. 17-28. Katholische T

Fri, 1 Jan 1954 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7736/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7736/1/7736.pdf Dettloff, Werner Dettloff, Werner (1954): Die Lehre von der acceptatio divina bei Johannes Duns Scotus mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Rechtfertigungslehre. Franziskanische Forschungen; Bd. 10. Werl/Westf.: Coelde