Isabel Iribarren
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- February 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199282319
- eISBN:
- 9780191603426
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199282315.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
The controversy between the Dominican Durandus of St Pourcain and his order plays a central role in explaining how Thomas Aquinas became one of the most influential ...
More
The controversy between the Dominican Durandus of St Pourcain and his order plays a central role in explaining how Thomas Aquinas became one of the most influential medieval theologians. Covering a period of almost twenty years in the early fourteenth century, this controversy saw the confrontation of two first-rate Dominican theologians, at a time when the order was fully engaged in promoting the doctrine of Aquinas. Hervaeus Natalis was a hard-line follower of Aquinas, who saw in Durandus an independent spirit and a threat to the order’s sense of doctrinal identity. Through a close examination of the central issues from unpublished manuscript sources, this book reveals a picture of the debate which challenges the standard accounts of a clear-cut clash between ‘Thomists’ and ‘anti-Thomists’. Aquinas did not rise to canonical status on a Dominican platform alone. Franciscan intellectual achievements had much to contribute, an aspect which recasts the role played by the rival mendicant order in the development of a Dominican intellectual tradition. A ‘maverick’ within his order, yet actively supported by the papacy, Durandus lived a career which illustrates the currents at work in the fourteenth-century church. Unconcerned about Dominican internal quarrels, the Avignonese papacy was more preoccupied with forming its own theological entourage away from the subverting forces of the new Franciscan spirituality.Less
The controversy between the Dominican Durandus of St Pourcain and his order plays a central role in explaining how Thomas Aquinas became one of the most influential medieval theologians. Covering a period of almost twenty years in the early fourteenth century, this controversy saw the confrontation of two first-rate Dominican theologians, at a time when the order was fully engaged in promoting the doctrine of Aquinas. Hervaeus Natalis was a hard-line follower of Aquinas, who saw in Durandus an independent spirit and a threat to the order’s sense of doctrinal identity. Through a close examination of the central issues from unpublished manuscript sources, this book reveals a picture of the debate which challenges the standard accounts of a clear-cut clash between ‘Thomists’ and ‘anti-Thomists’. Aquinas did not rise to canonical status on a Dominican platform alone. Franciscan intellectual achievements had much to contribute, an aspect which recasts the role played by the rival mendicant order in the development of a Dominican intellectual tradition. A ‘maverick’ within his order, yet actively supported by the papacy, Durandus lived a career which illustrates the currents at work in the fourteenth-century church. Unconcerned about Dominican internal quarrels, the Avignonese papacy was more preoccupied with forming its own theological entourage away from the subverting forces of the new Franciscan spirituality.
Livnat Holtzman
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- September 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780748689569
- eISBN:
- 9781474444828
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748689569.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Islam
More than any other issue in early and medieval Islamic theology, anthropomorphism (tashbīh) stood at the heart of many theological debates. These debates were not purely intellectual; they were ...
More
More than any other issue in early and medieval Islamic theology, anthropomorphism (tashbīh) stood at the heart of many theological debates. These debates were not purely intellectual; they were intrinsically linked to political struggles over hegemony. The way a scholar interpreted the anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Qur’an and the Hadith (for instance, God’s hand, God’s laughter or God’s sitting on the heavenly throne) often reflected his political and social stature, and his theological affinity. This book focuses on aḥādīth al-ṣifāt – the traditions that depict God and His attributes in an anthropomorphic language. The book reveals the way these traditions were studied and interpreted in the circles of Islamic traditionalism which included ultra-traditionalists (the Hanbalites and their forerunners) and middle-of-the-road traditionalists (Ash’arites and their forerunners). The book presents an in-depth literary analysis of aḥādīth al-ṣifāt while considering the role of the early scholars of Hadith in shaping the narrative of these anthropomorphic texts. The book also offers the first scholarly and systematic presentation of hand, face, and bodily gestures that the scholars performed while transmitting the anthropomorphic traditions. The book goes on to discuss the inner controversies in the prominent traditionalistic learning centres of the Islamic world regarding the way to understand and interpret these anthropomorphic traditions. Through a close, contextualized, and interdisciplinary reading in Hadith compilations, theological treatises, and historical sources, this book offers an evaluation and understanding of the traditionalistic endeavours to define anthropomorphism in the most crucial and indeed most formative period of Islamic thought.Less
More than any other issue in early and medieval Islamic theology, anthropomorphism (tashbīh) stood at the heart of many theological debates. These debates were not purely intellectual; they were intrinsically linked to political struggles over hegemony. The way a scholar interpreted the anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Qur’an and the Hadith (for instance, God’s hand, God’s laughter or God’s sitting on the heavenly throne) often reflected his political and social stature, and his theological affinity. This book focuses on aḥādīth al-ṣifāt – the traditions that depict God and His attributes in an anthropomorphic language. The book reveals the way these traditions were studied and interpreted in the circles of Islamic traditionalism which included ultra-traditionalists (the Hanbalites and their forerunners) and middle-of-the-road traditionalists (Ash’arites and their forerunners). The book presents an in-depth literary analysis of aḥādīth al-ṣifāt while considering the role of the early scholars of Hadith in shaping the narrative of these anthropomorphic texts. The book also offers the first scholarly and systematic presentation of hand, face, and bodily gestures that the scholars performed while transmitting the anthropomorphic traditions. The book goes on to discuss the inner controversies in the prominent traditionalistic learning centres of the Islamic world regarding the way to understand and interpret these anthropomorphic traditions. Through a close, contextualized, and interdisciplinary reading in Hadith compilations, theological treatises, and historical sources, this book offers an evaluation and understanding of the traditionalistic endeavours to define anthropomorphism in the most crucial and indeed most formative period of Islamic thought.
Brian Cummings
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198187356
- eISBN:
- 9780191674709
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198187356.003.0005
- Subject:
- Literature, 16th-century and Renaissance Literature, 17th-century and Restoration Literature
This chapter describes a debate between Erasmus and Luther, and concludes with the sensational literary and theological controversy that broke out between Erasmus and Luther in 1524. Luther was one ...
More
This chapter describes a debate between Erasmus and Luther, and concludes with the sensational literary and theological controversy that broke out between Erasmus and Luther in 1524. Luther was one of the first readers of Erasmus's new Bible in 1516. The chapter begins by exploring the politics of interpretation, and also explains Erasmus and Luther on Ecclesiasticus 15. The text from Ecclesiasticus, Luther says, is obscura et ambigua, and ‘proves nothing for certain’ (WA 18.666.25). What is required of Erasmus is a text that will show his case in claris verbis; but he cannot find one. At the same time, Luther objects that Erasmus's exegesis is far from showing his doctrine planissime. A discussion on the theologian and the grammarian, as well as the potter and the clay, is provided.Less
This chapter describes a debate between Erasmus and Luther, and concludes with the sensational literary and theological controversy that broke out between Erasmus and Luther in 1524. Luther was one of the first readers of Erasmus's new Bible in 1516. The chapter begins by exploring the politics of interpretation, and also explains Erasmus and Luther on Ecclesiasticus 15. The text from Ecclesiasticus, Luther says, is obscura et ambigua, and ‘proves nothing for certain’ (WA 18.666.25). What is required of Erasmus is a text that will show his case in claris verbis; but he cannot find one. At the same time, Luther objects that Erasmus's exegesis is far from showing his doctrine planissime. A discussion on the theologian and the grammarian, as well as the potter and the clay, is provided.
Matthew Levering
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199604524
- eISBN:
- 9780191729317
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199604524.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology, History of Christianity
The fourth chapter argues that the Reformation and early modern period focuses on trying to clarify the causal chain by which God communicates goodness to some and permits others to lack goodness. ...
More
The fourth chapter argues that the Reformation and early modern period focuses on trying to clarify the causal chain by which God communicates goodness to some and permits others to lack goodness. The result is that predestination becomes the central theological controversy of the early modern period. With the support of some biblical texts, Calvin argues that God actively causes everything, a position that endangers God's innocence. Molina posits a “middle knowledge” wherein God non-volitionally scans all possible causal chains so as to ensure that predestination takes into account what humans freely do. Francis de Sales combines insistence upon God's unlimited love of all rational creatures, with allowance of God's predestination of some rational creatures. The mechanistic approach of Leibniz further distances predestinarian doctrine from the God of love.Less
The fourth chapter argues that the Reformation and early modern period focuses on trying to clarify the causal chain by which God communicates goodness to some and permits others to lack goodness. The result is that predestination becomes the central theological controversy of the early modern period. With the support of some biblical texts, Calvin argues that God actively causes everything, a position that endangers God's innocence. Molina posits a “middle knowledge” wherein God non-volitionally scans all possible causal chains so as to ensure that predestination takes into account what humans freely do. Francis de Sales combines insistence upon God's unlimited love of all rational creatures, with allowance of God's predestination of some rational creatures. The mechanistic approach of Leibniz further distances predestinarian doctrine from the God of love.
Ruth Barton
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- May 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780226551616
- eISBN:
- 9780226551753
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226551753.003.0004
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
Various controversies in the early 1860s – over Darwin’s Origin, heretical publications by clergymen, and the science and politics of race – drew Lubbock and Spottiswoode into joint action with ...
More
Various controversies in the early 1860s – over Darwin’s Origin, heretical publications by clergymen, and the science and politics of race – drew Lubbock and Spottiswoode into joint action with Hooker, Huxley, and Busk. Huxley, Busk and Lubbock set new directions in their research, focusing on the gaps between apes and humans and between “savage” and “civilised” humans. They took over the Natural History Review, which carried this new research. Lubbock, Spottiswoode and Hooker sought to rouse scientific men to defend free enquiry in theology. In an effort to keep anthropology free from association with extreme racist politics, Lubbock, Huxley, and Busk became active in the Ethnological Society of London. In 1864, as controversy over the relationship between scientific enquiry and theological orthodoxy intensified, Spencer drew his scientific friends into alliance with liberal thinkers in politics and Church to contribute science articles to the weekly Reader and make it an organ of “liberal opinion.” At the same time as this common cause brought naturalists, physical scientists and Spencer together, the households of the Busks and the Lubbocks became the social centers for the growing network. From the common friendships and common causes the X Club was formed in November 1864.Less
Various controversies in the early 1860s – over Darwin’s Origin, heretical publications by clergymen, and the science and politics of race – drew Lubbock and Spottiswoode into joint action with Hooker, Huxley, and Busk. Huxley, Busk and Lubbock set new directions in their research, focusing on the gaps between apes and humans and between “savage” and “civilised” humans. They took over the Natural History Review, which carried this new research. Lubbock, Spottiswoode and Hooker sought to rouse scientific men to defend free enquiry in theology. In an effort to keep anthropology free from association with extreme racist politics, Lubbock, Huxley, and Busk became active in the Ethnological Society of London. In 1864, as controversy over the relationship between scientific enquiry and theological orthodoxy intensified, Spencer drew his scientific friends into alliance with liberal thinkers in politics and Church to contribute science articles to the weekly Reader and make it an organ of “liberal opinion.” At the same time as this common cause brought naturalists, physical scientists and Spencer together, the households of the Busks and the Lubbocks became the social centers for the growing network. From the common friendships and common causes the X Club was formed in November 1864.
Dirk van Miert
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- August 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198803935
- eISBN:
- 9780191842177
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198803935.003.0009
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies
Chapter 8 demonstrates how biblical scholarship became part of normal public discourse in the course of the 1650s and 1660s. Discussions on the Sabbath, on usury, on long hair, on vernacular ...
More
Chapter 8 demonstrates how biblical scholarship became part of normal public discourse in the course of the 1650s and 1660s. Discussions on the Sabbath, on usury, on long hair, on vernacular translations, on chronology, on the Septuagint all conspired to normalize textual criticism, linguistic analysis, and historical contextualization as ways of approaching the Bible, in juxtaposition with theological and dogmatic readings. Meanwhile, such theological discussions raged particularly in the 1660s, with pamphlet wars over newly voiced radical ideas. Together, all such disputes made very fertile ground for Spinoza’s radical biblical scholarship, which took its lead from precisely the philology developed and was made popular by Scaliger, the translators of the States’ Translation, Gomarus, Heinsius, Grotius, Saumaise, La Peyrère, Isaac Vossius, and a host of other participants in what had become a highly charged public debate over the status of the biblical text.Less
Chapter 8 demonstrates how biblical scholarship became part of normal public discourse in the course of the 1650s and 1660s. Discussions on the Sabbath, on usury, on long hair, on vernacular translations, on chronology, on the Septuagint all conspired to normalize textual criticism, linguistic analysis, and historical contextualization as ways of approaching the Bible, in juxtaposition with theological and dogmatic readings. Meanwhile, such theological discussions raged particularly in the 1660s, with pamphlet wars over newly voiced radical ideas. Together, all such disputes made very fertile ground for Spinoza’s radical biblical scholarship, which took its lead from precisely the philology developed and was made popular by Scaliger, the translators of the States’ Translation, Gomarus, Heinsius, Grotius, Saumaise, La Peyrère, Isaac Vossius, and a host of other participants in what had become a highly charged public debate over the status of the biblical text.
Muriel Debié and David Taylor
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780199236428
- eISBN:
- 9780191863349
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780199236428.003.0009
- Subject:
- History, Historiography
This chapter analyzes how Syriac historiography is a rare example of non-etatist, non-imperial, history writing. It was produced, copied, and preserved entirely within Christian church structures. ...
More
This chapter analyzes how Syriac historiography is a rare example of non-etatist, non-imperial, history writing. It was produced, copied, and preserved entirely within Christian church structures. The Syriac-using Christians, however, were divided into numerous rival denominations and communities as a consequence both of the fifth-century theological controversies and of geopolitical boundaries. And since both of these factors strongly influenced both the motivations which underpinned the production of history writing and the forms it took, historians need to have some knowledge of these rival Syriac denominations. Because of internal Christian debates about the relationship of the divinity and humanity within Christ during the fifth century, the Syriac-using churches fragmented. All accepted that Christ was perfect God and perfect man, but differed fiercely about how to articulate this.Less
This chapter analyzes how Syriac historiography is a rare example of non-etatist, non-imperial, history writing. It was produced, copied, and preserved entirely within Christian church structures. The Syriac-using Christians, however, were divided into numerous rival denominations and communities as a consequence both of the fifth-century theological controversies and of geopolitical boundaries. And since both of these factors strongly influenced both the motivations which underpinned the production of history writing and the forms it took, historians need to have some knowledge of these rival Syriac denominations. Because of internal Christian debates about the relationship of the divinity and humanity within Christ during the fifth century, the Syriac-using churches fragmented. All accepted that Christ was perfect God and perfect man, but differed fiercely about how to articulate this.
Jan Krans
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- November 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198806837
- eISBN:
- 9780191844379
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198806837.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies
The eventful career of the ‘Velesian readings’ constitute an instructive chapter in the history of New Testament exegesis. Around 1570, Pedro Fajardo, Marquis of los Vélez, jotted down some 2,000 ...
More
The eventful career of the ‘Velesian readings’ constitute an instructive chapter in the history of New Testament exegesis. Around 1570, Pedro Fajardo, Marquis of los Vélez, jotted down some 2,000 variant readings in a printed New Testament, giving later researchers the impression that these annotations resulted from a persistent perusal of Greek manuscripts. The original annotated book was never found, but the Velesian readings found their way into many editions, for example Walton’s 1657 Polyglot. Eventually, the readings were shown to be retranslations from Latin into Greek, intended to vindicate the Latin Vulgate against the received Greek text. This chapter traces the role scholars played in their unmasking. It shows that variant readings were of paramount importance in theological controversy.Less
The eventful career of the ‘Velesian readings’ constitute an instructive chapter in the history of New Testament exegesis. Around 1570, Pedro Fajardo, Marquis of los Vélez, jotted down some 2,000 variant readings in a printed New Testament, giving later researchers the impression that these annotations resulted from a persistent perusal of Greek manuscripts. The original annotated book was never found, but the Velesian readings found their way into many editions, for example Walton’s 1657 Polyglot. Eventually, the readings were shown to be retranslations from Latin into Greek, intended to vindicate the Latin Vulgate against the received Greek text. This chapter traces the role scholars played in their unmasking. It shows that variant readings were of paramount importance in theological controversy.
