Autor: Crowe, Frederich E., S.J.

Buch: Theology of the Christian Word

Titel: Theology of the Christian Word

Stichwort: Mittelalter: Fehlen d. Frage n. den loci; William von Ockham: entscheidene Frage; J. Wycliffe

Kurzinhalt: William of Occam: Are all the truths necessary for salvation in the bible, or are they not?

Textausschnitt: 74a A long interval separates Nicea from the Reformation. During most of it little thought was given to the question of loci which, in its own form, had so exercised Ireneus and Tertullian. Basil of Cesarea, Augustine himself in another aspect of his thought, Vincent of Lerins, even Thomas Aquinas - all of them could be included in a full and detailed history. But none of them, it seems to me, made the significant contribution to the forward movement of theology that we are looking for. This long repetitive period seems strange at first sight, but reflection may show it to be normal enough. On the one side there was the unparalleled development of the objective side of theology that the Middle Ages witnessed; with the wealth of patristic writings to draw on, and the seemingly inexhaustible fertility of the human mind to stimulate more and still more questions for the systematizing of that wealth, the theologians had enough to put all idle minds to work. On the other side, that of the agent of the word, there was no acutely felt need during all these centuries. Nicea had brought in the idea of the magisterium as the present agent for determining the faith; the church appeared as the authorized interpreter of God's word, legitimately linked with the past and recognized as the immediate source of dogma; why bother about more? In some societies, when needs are satisfied, inventions decline. There was little felt need for careful definition of the original sources, still less for determining their relation to the present, the theme that will occupy us in chapter five. The immediate source was enough; it told us all we know on earth about God's word, and all we need to know. (Fs) (notabene)

74a Nevertheless, there was a built-in source of tension on the subjective side of the situation, and perhaps history was waiting only for men's minds to tire of the mental gymnastics of systematic theology to bring it on the stage. The situation was this: The immediate voice and spokesman for God's word was in the present, but it had its authority only from the past and was legitimate only insofar as it maintained continuity with the past. Further, the all-important part of the past was the age of Christ and the apostles. It was rendered accessible through the scriptures but, as they receded further and further in time, the jump from scriptures into the present age became more and more a problem. The resulting tension appears in the late Middle Ages, and can be studied in the work of Oberman and others. For my purpose it is sufficient to consult Paul De Vooght and his book on the sources of doctrine as they are revealed in the theologians of the 14th century. (Fs)

75a The period studied by De Vooght lies between 1317 and 1414, and marks the beginning of the trend toward treatises de locis theologicis. The background to the new stirring has a deceptive simplicity. In the Middle Ages the scriptures were the manual of theology (at least in principle-in practice the theologians wrote commentaries on Peter Lombard's Sentences). Further, casual statements made at the time would conclude logically to a doctrine of sola scriptura. Yet logic cannot really be applied at this point, before the terms are worked out and the premises accurately stated. Theologians may talk as if all their doctrine were in scripture but, when they come to difficult matters like the doctrine on the sacraments or that on the Filioque, they are capable of statements in the diametrically opposite direction: multa non scripta, or non omne scriptum. The situation has the confusion common in a time prior to thematization, when the question is not clearly stated. (Fs)

75b It was William of Occam , according to De Vooght, who first put the clear question: Are all the truths necessary for salvation in the bible, or are they not? Occam gives reasons for both sides, but does not himself settle the question. Wycliffe goes farther and assumes his own fairly definite position. Finding himself in a situation where church and scripture seem to conflict, he is forced to think their relations through. His conclusion: Scripture and tradition come first, and then the church. He does not make a complete break with the past, but respects the normative function of traditional interpretation of scripture. His polemic, in fact, is more against pope and curia than against the church. Still the direction of his movement is clear and, since at the same time Henry of Totting is moving toward the other pole and extending the list of truths not found in scripture, the ways are dividing. (Fs)