Epistemology of Theology

Analytic theology has, since its inception, been a metaphysics-heavy enterprise. Indeed, a brief perusal of the contents of The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology (i.e. a predecessor to the present volume under review) reveals as much. My noting this emphasis on metaphysics is not a criticism, for the fruits of Christian analytic metaphysics have been widespread indeed. Nevertheless, developments in epistemology have been at least as significant in many respects as those in metaphysics, and thus, the comparative rarity with which they emerge in discussion in contemporary theology is unfortunate. Such a lament, however, has in recent times become less apt, for with the release of The Oxford Handbook of the Epistemology of Theology, we now have a text which ably introduces its audience of theologians, scriptural scholars, and philosophers to a broad class of epistemological concerns for theology. No one writing in analytic theology should remain wholly ignorant of its contents, which hail from many of the best epistemological and theological minds today.

Published from 1899 to 1950 the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique has long been considered the incarnation of conservative doctrinal positions. Revisiting articles that examine areas and methods of theology, such as the canon Albert Michel’s « Fondamentale ou générale (théologie) », Ambroise Gardeil’s « Lieux théologiques », Thomas Deman’s « Salamanque (théologiens de) », Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange’s « Thomisme » or even Yves Congar’s « Théologie », one in fact realizes the extent to which the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique actively contributed to the major epistemological debates and helped revitalize the field of contemporay catholic theology.

Publié de 1899 à 1950, le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique a longtemps été considéré comme l’incarnation de positions doctrinales conservatrices. À parcourir les articles qui traitent en son sein des domaines et des méthodes de la théologie, comme les articles « Fondamentale ou générale (théologie) » du chanoine Albert Michel, « Lieux théologiques » d’Ambroise Gardeil, « Salamanque (théologiens de) » de Thomas Deman, « Thomisme » de Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange ou encore « Théologie » d’Yves Congar, force est de constater que le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique a en réalité activement participé aux grands débats épistémologiques qui ont contribué à renouveler profondément le champ de la théologie catholique contemporaine.

An important feature of spiritual formation involves finding reliable processes, people, practices, and materials that put one in the best position to cultivate the spiritual life and to achieve the specified goals (e.g. purity of heart, discernment, and the vision of God). Accordingly, this chapter draws attention to some works that connect philosophy (including some epistemological themes and issues) and spirituality (including the topic of spiritual formation). It also spells out some of the main features of John Cassian’s (ca. 360-435 CE) account of spiritual formation. In particular, it focuses on his understanding of the penultimate and ultimate goals of spiritual formation, of the importance of relying on others for making epistemic progress in the spiritual life, and of the three indicators that help determine whether a person is a reliable spiritual authority. The chapter concludes by identifying briefly three areas that deserve further epistemological attention.

Chapter Keywords: John Cassian, spiritual formation, indicators of spiritual authority, discernment, purity of heart, spiritual perception

One of the most colossal editorial undertakings was the publication, by the publishing house Letouzey and Ané, of the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (Dictionary of Catholic Theology). Covering more than half a century from 1899 to 1950, the fifteen tomes divided in thirty volumes, represent one of their most beautiful achievements. Successively headed by Abbots Alfred Vacant (1852-1901), Eugène Mangenot (1856-1922) and Émile Amann (1880-1948), the work was barely finished, such that Letouzey and Ané, from 1951, published the first of eighteen fascicles of the Tables générales, whose compilation, led by Canon Albert Michel (1877-1972), would require a further twenty years of work. Until 1972, the Tables générales represented a commendable insight, albeit measured, into the most recent themes of theological reflection, albeit progressive, aggiornamento, the effects of which this article attempts to quantify.
La publication du Dictionnaire de Théologie catholique par les éditions Letouzé et Ané constitue une œuvre colossale, étalée de 1899 à 1950 : 15 tomes répartis en 30 volumes. Le DThC a été successivement dirigé par Alfred Vacant (1852-1901), Eugène Mangenot (1856-1922) et Émile Amann (1880-1948). À peine le dernier fascicule était-il publié que l’éditeur offrait, en 1951, le premier des 18 fascicules des Tables générales dues au chanoine Albert Michel (1877-1972). Leur mise au point prit finalement une vingtaine d’années, jusqu’en 1972, et permit l’introduction, méritoire et mesurée, de thèmes nouveaux, récemment abordés par la recherche théologique, une sorte d’aggiornamento progressif du DThC, que cet article se propose d’étudier.

Este livro tem como objetivo sistematizar os elementos básicos da disciplina de Epistemologia da Teologia, o qual proporcionará um contato com os principais tópicos, autores e obras da área, além dos instrumentos necessários, não apenas para acompanhar a disciplina ofertada, mas também para os estudos autônomos posteriores.

A epistemologia, em uma perspectiva ampla, pode ser caracterizada como o estudo do conhecimento. Dentro da disciplina da filosofia, a epistemologia é o estudo da natureza do conhecimento e da justificação. Em particular, é o estudo do conhecimento e da justificação em três aspectos: seus componentes definidores, suas condições ou fontes substantivas, e os seus limites.

Tem sido comum na epistemologia dar atenção cuidadosa não apenas à epistemologia como empreendimento genérico, mas também explorar detalhadamente a epistemologia de disciplinas acadêmicas específicas. A epistemologia da ciência, por exemplo, recebeu a maior parte do interesse. Mas também se deu atenção à matemática, à história, à estética e à ética. O mandado crucial para esses desenvolvimentos posteriores remonta a Aristóteles quando ele insistiu no que poderíamos chamar de princípio de ajuste epistêmico. Devemos ajustar nossas avaliações epistêmicas de forma apropriada ao assunto sob investigação. Como resultado, não esperamos que as afirmações históricas sejam avaliadas pelo tipo de argumentos que se aplicariam à matemática e às ciências naturais. Surpreendentemente - dada a atenção dirigida a reivindicações teológicas - esta visão não tem sido sistematicamente explorada no caso da teologia. Apesar da riqueza do material disponível tanto na filosofia como na teologia ao longo dos séculos, não tem havido nenhum esforço concertado para articular e examinar o que conta como avaliação epistemológica apropriada em teologia.

Por epistemologia da teologia, entendemos uma investigação crítica da desiderata epistêmica apropriada aplicada à teologia. Acreditamos que o tempo está maduro na filosofia e na teologia para tal empreendimento. E estamos convencidos de que há uma grande necessidade para o desenvolvimento desta nova conversa que terá seu lugar natural na interseção da teologia e da filosofia. Este livro se propõe a introduzir esta conversa.

No primeiro capítulo introduzimos o objeto de estudo da epistemologia e seus métodos de investigação, identificando os principais problemas e questões que neste campo são comumente levantadas.

No segundo capítulo nosso foco foi o de apresentar a epistemologia da teologia ou da religião propriamente dita, descrevendo a relação entre estas áreas de conhecimento. Exploramos aqui questões atuais de debates entre posições distintas como o fideísmo, o evidencialismo e a epistemologia reformada.

No terceiro capítulo aprofundamos as implicações epistemológicas do conhecimento religioso, percorrendo questões sobre a razoabilidade da crença religiosa e da própria possibilidade de um conhecimento religioso. O foco aqui foi particularmente na questão da justificação e da racionalidade de tal conhecimento.

No quarto, quinto e sexto capítulos, tratamos dos argumentos teístas e antiteístas para a existência divina. Foram abordados os argumentos cosmológicos, teleológicos e ontológicos respectivamente. A proposta foi expor de maneira mais objetiva possível a lógica das argumentações em suas várias formas, iniciais e atuais, e de suas contra-argumentações.

Finalmente, no sétimo capítulo, apresentaremos vários argumentos antiteístas, assim como as respostas aos mesmos, ao problema do mal. A proposta aqui, tal como nos três capítulos anteriores mencionados, é de explicitar a maneira como a justificação e a racionalidade de argumentos filosóficos e teológicos podem ser articuladas e permitirem uma análise mais apurada da própria crença religiosa.

Este é um dos principais objetivos da epistemologia da teologia ou da religião, nos auxiliar a perceber a justificabilidade e a racionalidade do conhecimento religioso. Aplicar, portanto, a epistemologia à teologia e ao conhecimento religioso é um empreendimento certamente repleto de desafios, mas pleno de possibilidades para um crescimento acadêmico e pessoal.

Achevé trop tard dans une époque marquée par la crise de la réflexion théologique postconciliaire, le fameux Dictionnaire de théologie catholique publié de 1899 à 1972 par la maison Letouzey et Ané a été considéré comme le recueil d’une pensée périmée. À examiner les articles qui y sont consacrés à la théologie morale, il apparaît que le constat mérite amplement d’être reconsidéré. Le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique a en effet bénéficié de la collaboration de théologiens moralistes dominicains qui, tels les PP. Ambroise Gardeil, Benoît-Marie Schwalm, Henri-Dominique Noble, Thomas Deman ou encore Jean-François Tonneau ont appartenu à l’école du Saulchoir et qui, en proposant un nouvel équilibre entre théologies positive, pratique et scolastique, ont travaillé à la réhabilitation d’une théologie morale qui s’était trop longtemps réduite à la casuistique.

On a jusqu’ici prêté trop peu d’attention à ce qu’il pouvait y avoir de révélateur d’une mutation profonde de la science théologique dans le monumental Dictionnaire de théologie catholique publié de 1899 à 1950 par les éditions Letouzey et Ané. Loin d’avoir été le défenseur d’une conception conservatrice de la théologie, le « Vacant et Mangenot », dont la réalisation commence au temps de la crise moderniste, a su faire place à des travaux qui manifestent le souci de rééquilibrer les rôles respectifs de la théologie spéculative et de la positive. Le présent article entend montrer qu’à plusieurs égards, la démarche théologique mise en œuvre dans le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique rejoint les impératifs épistémologiques et méthodologiques définis à la même époque par les grands représentants de l’école du Saulchoir.

In recent years, William J. Abraham has suggested the creation of a new subdiscipline for examining the epistemology of theology. This article provides an overview of this proposal, highlighting some of the philosophical concepts, such as ‘Aristotelian epistemic fit’ and
particularism, that Abraham drew upon when formulating this approach. It then proceeds to an examination of Abraham’s application of these ideas to his preferred theological scheme, canonical theism. Limitations and challenges to Abraham’s position are discussed as well as ways in which weaknesses in his approach might be addressed.

Conferencia pronunciada en las XV Jornadas de Teología Fundamental (Valladolid).
RESUMEN: El artículo plantea el problema de la racionalidad de las creencias re­ ligiosas en comparación con los enunciados científicos. Se estudia la relación entre ciencia y la fe en el modelo clásico y en el postconciliar indicando algu­ nas debilidades de este último. Finaliza el trabajo con un análisis epistemoló­ gico de las creencias cristianas.
PALABRAS CLAVE: Ciencia y fe; enunciados teológicos; epistemología religiosa; teología fundamental.
ABSTRACT: This lecture raises the question of the rationality of religious beliefs com­ pared to scientific statements. It examines the relation between science and Chris­ tian faith in the classical and post-Vatican II model indicating some weaknesses of later. The paper ends with an epistemological analysis of Christian belief.

Publié de 1899 à 1950 aux éditions Letouzey et Ané et complété entre 1951 et 1972 par des tables générales, le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique constitue encore aujourd’hui une somme de référence. Dirigée au départ par Alfred Vacant, à qui succède Eugène Mangenot, avant qu’il ne revînt à Émile Amann, puis au chanoine Albert Michel d’assumer l’achèvement du travail, l’entreprise a abouti à un ouvrage qui contient vingt mille pages de textes se répartissant en quelque cinq mille articles rédigés par plusieurs centaines d’auteurs. Le projet s’inscrit dans une politique éditoriale qui a conduit les éditions Letouzey et Ané à lancer les publications successives d’un Dictionnaire de la Bible, d’un Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, d’un Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques et d’un Dictionnaire de droit canonique. Il s’agissait, de la part des éditions Letouzey et Ané, de proposer une véritable encyclopédie catholique en cinq dictionnaires. À la même époque, les éditions Beauchesne s’attellent à la confection d’un Dictionnaire apologétique de la foi catholique publié de 1909 à 1928. L’objectif du colloque organisé à l’Université de Limoges les 7 et 8 juin 2013 par l’EA 4270 (CRIHAM) était de permettre de dresser une table d’orientation à l’intérieur du massif foisonnant qu’est le Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, d’étudier les engagements doctrinaux adoptés par les auteurs, de voir dans quelle mesure les contributions ont reflété l’état contemporain de la recherche historique, de relever la volonté des collaborateurs de s’insérer dans l’actualité théologique et d’essayer de cerner l’image qu’ils ont proposée des grandes périodes de l’histoire de l’Église et du christianisme.

14
Pensamiento Humanista | No. 08 | Enero-Diciembre (2011)
  C  e  n  t  r  o  d  e  H  u  m  a  n  i  d  a  d  e  s    |    U  P  B    |    M  e  d  e  l  l  í  n ,  C  o  l  o  m  b  i  a
Johan Espinoza Rojas
Resumen:
Este ensayo estudia las cuestiones epistemológicas en torno a la eología Latinoamericana de la Liberación (LL). Esto nos llevará a indagar: el puntode partida de esta teología (los pobres, oprimidos y la praxis que los libera); elmétodo que usa para conocer, muy ligado a la Hermenéutica de la Liberación; la relación que tiene con el marxismo, debida más que todo al reconocimiento de las
estructuras empobrecedoras;
la relación que tiene con las ciencias sociales, que no esde dependencia, sino de prestación de herramientas de conocimiento; y por último,los supuestos ontológicos para identicar de qué manera es observado el pobre y la realidad que lo circunscribe, y los supuestos axiológicos para determinar los valoresy comportamientos ante el estudio que debe poseer el teólogo de la liberación.

Chapter Five sharpens the book’s criticism of exclusivist responsible to religious multiplicity, firstly through close critical attention to arguments which religious exclusivists provide, and secondly through the introduction of several new, formal arguments / dilemmas. Self-described ‘post-liberals’ like Paul Griffiths bid philosophers to accept exclusivist attitudes and beliefs as just one among other aspects of religious identity. They bid us to normalize the discourse Griffiths refers to as “polemical apologetics,” and to view its acceptance as the only viable form of pluralism. This reasoning may seem initially plausible, but on closer examination his and other’s defence of the reasonableness of exclusivist responses to religious multiplicity fall apart. Informed by our study of luck-leaning theological explanations of religious difference and the counter-inductive thinking they exemplify, I argue that exclusivist responses to religious multiplicity are best explained by personal and group bias, and that a discourse between exclusivist authors or sects is beyond the pale of reasonable disagreement.
      Our study of descriptive (psychological) and prescriptive (religious) fideism in the first sections of Chapter Five suggests that we turn back to formal features of doxastic methods (i.e., of how people process), features that may be straightforwardly tested for in studies utilizing scales of religious orientation.These formal features allow us to better recognize not only the multiplicity of models of faith that religious adherents adhere to, but also that the relationship between forms of fideism is scalar: there is a spectrum of views running from rationalism to fideism, and at the fideistic end from moderate to strong forms of religious fideism. I further explain why developing tests and markers for a high degree of fideistic orientation is important to all those who study religion.
      The second half of the chapter turns to criticism or censure of exclusivist attitudes to religious multiplicity, in contrast to apologetic defenses of exclusivism. While we have examined the close connections between fideism and fundamentalism, and again between fundamentalism and exclusivism in earlier chapters, a sharper focus reveals an important but little-recognized distinction reflected in the literature: the distinction between religion-specific (or particularist) and mutualist exclusivism. The mutualist doesn’t talk just about the right of adherents of one specific religion to assert exclusivism, but the adherents of any and all “home” religions. I argue that some previously unrecognized problems for the reasonableness of exclusivist responses to religious multiplicity are brought to light when we make the distinction between the two basic ways to understand the claim that exclusivists are making. I put particularist (Barth, Lindbeck, Plantinga) and mutualist (Griffiths, Gellman, Margalit, D’Costa) defenses of exclusivism on the horns of a dilemma, and argue that despite the popularity it presently enjoys among post-liberal theologians, a close examination reveals that the very conceptual coherence of mutualist exclusivism is in serious doubt.

Le deuxième tiers du XVIIIe siècle voit le développement en péninsule italienne d’une vaste offensive rigoriste à l’encontre de la morale prétendument relâchée des casuistes. Le dominicain Daniele Concina (1687-1756), suivi par son confrère et disciple Giovanni Vincenzo Patuzzi (1700-1769), a inlassablement défendu la cause de la sévérité. Respectant les recommandations formulées par le célèbre érudit modénais Ludovico-Antonio Muratori (1672-1750) dans ses Riflessioni sopra il buon gusto et dans son traité De ingeniorum moderatione in religionis negotio, Concina et Patuzzi ont proposé une réforme de la théologie morale considérée comme savoir qui en fasse une science d’érudition. Les outils de la critique érudite sont mobilisés au profit d’une théologie morale qui, refusant l’éparpillement congénital de la casuistique, retrouve le sens même du projet thomasien d’une science des mœurs en quête de la vérité.

Many Christian traditions affirm a doctrine of assurance. According to this doctrine, those who are saved have assurance of their own salvation; that is, the doctrine of assurance tells us that the elect can know their status as elect. In this paper, I explore two developments of the doctrine of assurance by theologians (i.e. John Calvin & Kenneth Keathley) and argue that they fail to accommodate the fallibilistic nature of human knowing. I then develop a fallibilistic doctrine of assurance, which makes such assurance available to most Christians, and respond to an objection from the camp of pragmatic encroachment.

In this paper, I highlight a tension between a common methodology in philosophical inquiry and some construals of the doctrine of the Fall. I then present an argument from an extreme interpretation of the doctrine of the Fall to the conclusion that no human person ought to trust their cognitive faculties. I then demonstrate that the argument is self-defeating in nature and that for reasons concerning the nature of epistemic self-trust, epistemic rationality cannot reasonably be called into question by reflections concerning original sin and the Fall.

In questo lavoro si tenta una ricostruzione della problematica epistemologica in teologia nel pensiero di W. Pannenberg, inquadrando la proposta del teologo tedesco all'interno del contesto della riflessione epistemologica novecentesca "classica". L'analisi  conduce a individuare, in Pannenberg, l'epistemologia teologica come compito primo della teologia fondamentale e, allo stesso tempo, ad alcune considerazioni circa l'insufficienza del pensiero pannenberghiano in merito al compimento di questo stesso progetto fondativo.