A History of Christian Theology

Class Notes #9 – November 29, 2006

Chapters 13

1. O God, who hast sent thy beloved Son to be unto us the Way, the Truth and the Life, Grant that we, looking unto him, may set forward the teaching power of thy Church, to the nurture of thy people, the increase of thy Kingdom, and the glory of thy Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

2. Recap last class – November 15, 2006
   
   

3. The Catholic Reformation – pp 200 How does one respond to a perceived need for reform?

1. You can replace the existing power structure

                                                               i.      Luther

1.      replace the Pope and councils for Scripture

2.      replace salvation by works with justification by faith alone

2. You can eliminate power structures entirely

                                                               i.      Some of the more extreme protestants – do away with all church hierarchy or even with ‘church’ itself

1.      the Nominalists – all authority is to be distrusted and overthrown

3. You can repair, cleans and reform the existing power structure

                                                               i.      The Catholic Reformation (or Counter-Reformation)

How do these options compare to the issues we find in the church (especially the Anglican Church) today

4. Council of Trent (1545-1563 AD)

1. Accepted importance of scripture, but allowed important (equal?) weighting for tradition.

                                                               i.      After all….early disciples had tradition before they had scripture!

                                                             ii.      Liturgical practices not specifically in scripture were important to theology and understanding – Lex Orandi Lex Credendi – what is prayed indicates what may and must be believed.

1.      Reformers established control over worship (Doctrine over liturgy)

2.      Catholics appealed to past and present liturgical practices in order to justify doctrinal positions.

Wainwright – pp 220 Doxology (quoting Tyrell): “The ‘deposit of faith is not merely a symbol or creed, but is a concrete religion left by Christ to his Church; it is perhaps in some sense more directly a lex orandi than a lex credendi…….Devotion and religion existed before theology, in the way that art existed before art-criticism; reasoning before logic, speech before grammar”.

Wainwright pp 223 (from Pope Pius XII “The sacred liturgy has a very close connexion with the chief doctrines that the Church teaches as most certainly true; it must therefore remain in perfect conformity with the pronouncements on the Catholic faith issues by the Church’s supreme teaching authority to safeguard the integrity of revealed truth”.

Read Wainwright pp 238/9 (from Pius IX’s encyclical Ineffabilis Deus).

                                                            iii.      As another example of changes in liturgy chancing belief, see the new Prayerbook…changes in the baptismal service, inclusive language etc.:

Also, the use of “inclusive language” in the translation of the Psalter so as to make women of a particular political outlook feel at home in using it. Thus the “man-centered” nature of the psalms is toned down and modified. However, when the word “man” is changed to “they” (as in Psalm 1), the traditional use of the Psalter as the prayer of the Church in and with Christ, united to him as the Head of the Body, and as the prayer of Jesus Christ within His Body, becomes impossible for, according to the Fathers, the “man” in Psalm 1 (as elsewhere) is the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. To pray the Psalms as the Church has prayed them over the centuries, the text must read, “Blessed is the Man…” not “Happy are they….” The inspired text, as God has given it to be written down, is already inclusive of every faithful human being, man or woman. ( from Toon - http://www.pbsusa.org/Articles/1979Critique.htm)

2. Pp 203 – Trent affirmed the concept of Original Sin;

                                                               i.      however Trent held that free will was not destroyed (as Luther said) but weakened.

                                                             ii.      And, in the regenerate, the mere desire to sin is no truly sinful in the regenerate.

3. Pp 203 Justification

                                                               i.      Affirmed justification is by grace but believed that human efforts mattered as well… we must cooperate with the grace given (read bottom of pp 203…”God does not command….”

                                                             ii.      Pp 204 – “Grace comes first, an awakening and assisting grace that begins the process of justification, but people must consent to and cooperate with that grace”.

4. Pp 204 Sacraments and Reform

                                                               i.      Affirmed 7 sacraments as means of grace and which assist in our salvation (Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Matrimony, Penance, Unction, Holy Orders) .

                                                             ii.      Affirmed Transubstantiation

                                                            iii.      Insisted that Christ’s sacrifice is repeated on the altar at every Eucharist – this was rejected by ALL of the reformers. Luther believed it to be a major source of superstition.

                                                           iv.      Affirmed purgatory and the benefits of prayer & purgatory for those there.

5.  PP 212  What is sin? Jesuits & the development of “probabilism”.

1. Jesuits developed the belief that you could not sin without the intention of doing so…intent, not the act, was the key.

2. Ways of working through “doubtful cases” (as discussed by the Scholastics and the Anglican Caroline Divines)

                                                               i.      Tutiorism (or rigorism) – An issue must be proved beyond all doubt if it is to be done. If any doubt remains the act should not be done

                                                             ii.      Probabiliorism – you may do something if the preponderance of proof allowed the action.

                                                            iii.      Equi-probabliorism – if it is equally probably that something is good or not good, you may do it.

                                                           iv.      Probabilism – if there is any reasonable possibility that something is good, it is permissible – you may do it.