Reformed scholasticism

John Davenant, Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity and a British delegate to the Synod of Dordt, was a widely praised English Reformed theologian, but his exposition of the doctrine of predestination has been largely neglected. The present essay shows that, for Davenant, Thomas Aquinas remained among the “sounder scholastics,” whose views on predestination and free choice aligned closely with Reformed theology and helped to illustrate the traditionalism of Reformed theology in the face of Jesuit and Arminian theological innovation.

PDF - INTRODUCTION ONLY (7 pages)

In: G. Quispel (ed.), De hermetische Gnosis in de loop der eeuwen, Haarlem 20034, 383-394.

German translation: ‘Gisbertus Voetius, Hermes Trismegistos und Jakob Boehme, in: G. Quispel (ed.), Die hermetische Gnosis im Lauf der Jahrhunderte, Birnbach: DRP Verlag 2001, 389-401

헤르만 바빙크(1854-1921)는 교의학자였지만 중요한 윤리학 작품도 남겼다. 최근에 발간된 『개혁파 윤리학』은 아주 탁월한 기독교 윤리학 저서이다. 바빙크의 『개혁교의학』과 『개혁파 윤리학』은 다음과 같은 밀접한 관련성이 있다. 첫째, 『개혁파 윤리학』은 『개혁교의학』에 나타난 종합적-발생론적 방법론을 사용한다. 둘째, 『개혁파 윤리학』은 교의학과 윤리학의 상호보완적 관계성을 유지한다. 셋째, 『개혁파 윤리학』은 교의학과 윤리학을 밀접하게 관련시키면서도, 교의학을 너무 많이 개입시키지 않고 윤리학에서 꼭 다뤄야 하는 교의학의 내용만을 엄선해서 다룬다. 넷째, 『개혁파 윤리학』의 내용은 『개혁교의학』과 내용상으로 짝을 이룬다. 다섯째, 바빙크는 교의학과 윤리학에서 철학과 깊이 있게 대화한다. 여섯째, 바빙크의 교의학과 윤리학은 초기 근대 개혁파 신학에서 많은 내용들을 인용하고 다룬다. 일곱째, 바빙크의 교의학과 윤리학은 성경을 근거로 주제를 전개하고 결론을 완성한다. 바빙크 사후 100주년을 기념하는 오늘날의 개혁신학이 앞으로의 100년을 건설적으로 모색하고자 한다면, 바빙크라는 거인의 어깨에 올라가서 보다 성경적이면서도, 역사적 자료에 충실하고, 현대 학문과 대화하면서, 오늘날의 교회와 사회의 구체적 문제에 응답하는 교의학과 윤리학을 발전시켜 나가야 할 것이다.
====
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) was a dogmatician, but he also wrote important ethical works. The recently published Reformist Ethics is an excellent book on Christian ethics. Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics and his Reformed Ethics are closely related. (1) Reformed Ethics uses the synthetic-genetic method endorsed in Reformed Dogmatics; (2) Reformed Ethics shows a complementary relationship between dogmatics and ethics; (3) Reformed Ethics intimately relates dogmatics to ethics but carefully selects and treats only the theological topics that should be dealt with in ethics without involving dogmatics too much; (4) the content of Reformed Ethics is paired with Reformed Dogmatics; (5) Bavinck has an in-depth dialogue with philosophy in both works; (6) the two works quote and deal with a lot of material from early modern Reformed theology; and (7) Reformed Dogmatics and Reformed Ethics develop the subjects and complete their conclusions based on the Scriptures. If today’s Reformed theology, commemorating the 100th anniversary of Bavinck’s death, wants to constructively explore the next 100 years, it should climb on his shoulders and develop dogmatics and ethics that respond to specific problems of the church and society while being more biblical and faithful to historical data and conversing with modern academic studies.

Abstract
This research thesis explores the method and content in the Evangelical process model of relational theism as advanced in the writings of Thomas Jay Oord. The specific aim of the thesis is to evaluate and critique Oord’s model of divine providence, identifying the internal inconsistencies within Oord’s philosophical and theological framework, problems in his methodology, and clearing up misconceptions he and the process tradition have of classical theism, while constructively showing that the general sense of Scripture agrees more with classical theism than process theism, as it pertains to divine power.

This thesis concludes that Oord’s Evangelical process theology is insufficient as a biblical model due to its inability to harmonize with the various complexities and themes of Scripture, which a robust doctrine of providence requires. While admitting that the Bible does not have an internally consistent definition of love, Oord set out to formulate a definition of love, descriptive of God’s love in Scripture, claiming that it is the dominant form of love in the Bible. His attempt, however, proved unsatisfactory because his methods were flawed in that he limited his scope to biblical texts that supported a philosophically contrived definition of love. Oord’s process metaphysic placed a stricture on God’s power that was exegetically unjustifiable, and he advanced a straw-man argument against a conception of coercion, which comprised his strongest objection against classical theology, that classical theism does not, and never has, affirmed. His model is inadequate as a viable alternative to classical theology because its metaphysics cannot support and account for biblical truths he affirms that were originally formulated in the long-standing classical tradition of Christian theism, which he rejects. Oord claims that Scripture functioned as his primary source and guide in the formulation of his theology. However, this thesis concludes that his theological framework is axiomatically grounded in process metaphysics, serving as the “handler” instead of the “handmaiden” in constructing a relational model of Christian theism.

Onderzoek naar de receptie van de rechtvaardigingsleer van Alexander Comrie (1706-1774) in de gereformeerde gezindte tijdens de twintigste eeuw.
Traces of Comries doctrine of justification: An investigation into the reception of the justification doctrine of Alexander Comrie (1706-1774) in the Reformed tradition in the Netherlands during the twentieth century.

When in 1753 the Scottish-Dutch minister Alexander Comrie (1706-1774) published a commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, his interpretation of Question 20 about faith received much critique. In Comrie's view, not the act but the habit of faith is the instrument of justification. In this article, I suggest that Comrie is influenced by the New-England divine John Cotton, who held the same view and was therefore accused of antinomianism by the Scottish theologian Robert Baillie.

The Scottish Presbyterian theologian David Dickson (c.1583-1663) contributed very much to the development of the doctrine of the covenant of redemption (i.e., the pactum salutis). Although his doctrine stood in the early stages of its development, it comprised important elements of the doctrine. He formulated the doctrine from exegetical, doctrinal, and elenctic perspectives.
Dickson’s commentaries on Hebrews, the New Testament letters, Matthew, and Psalms persuasively offer biblical foundations for the doctrine. The Summe of Saving Knowledge (1649), a companion piece to the Westminster Confession of Faith and a collaborative work with James Durham, clearly sets forth the threefold covenant scheme—the covenant of works, the covenant of redemption, and the covenant of grace. Therapeutica Sacra, which treats the doctrine of regeneration, also presents the doctrine of the covenant of redemption in detail.
Dickson’s “Speech to the General Assembly” (1638) endorses the doctrine to refute the errors of Arminianism. In his various works, Dickson harmonized the doctrine of the covenant of redemption with other doctrines such as Trinitology and Christology along with the basic tenets of Reformed theology, and in so doing he developed Reformed theology more deeply. He also found the doctrine of the covenant of redemption in the Westminster Confession of Faith and rooted the doctrine within Reformed circles. Most of all, Dickson practically applied the doctrine in his Therapeutica Sacra to the life of believers to provide them with a vivid dynamic for sanctification as well as a full assurance of salvation.
In sum, the above characteristics of Dickson’s doctrine of the covenant of redemption played a very important role for the orientation and development of the doctrine for Reformed theology and life.

Key Words: David Dickson, the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis), Scottish Presbyterian, Westminster Confession of Faith, the errors of Arminianism

This is an analysis of the argument and sources of Herman Bavinck's (1854-1921) discussion of the principia of science in his Reformed Dogmatics. Bavinck draws heavily on Aquinas's treatment of the powers of the soul as he argues for a realist via media in contrast to modern trends of rationalism and empiricism.

This book presents a new critical Latin edition and an English translation of Johannes Maccovius' (1588-1644) seminal and fascinating work on theological and philosophical distinctions. The Distinctiones are immensely helpful for today's students of Post-Reformation theology who try to understand Protestant scholastic discourse in light of its own concerns and vocabulary.

Few issues have been as divisive for the contemporary church as the doctrine of irre- sistible grace. In the debates surrounding this doctrine, there has been an overwhelm- ing tendency for theologies of grace to focus on the effects that grace has on particular human beings. Alongside this tendency, there has arisen a danger that we forget that God’s grace is God’s grace; that it is God’s free, personal, and beneficent disposition and action. In this article, I turn to Karl Barth to consider a way forward for interpreting the irresistible nature of grace that does not focus on its effectuality but on its theocentric, participative, and covenantal character.

James Dalrymple of Stair is famous for his Institutions of the Law of Scotland (1681). This is a translation of his "Theses ethicae", part of a larger set of philosophical theses in 1646. Dalrymple taught ethics and other philosophical disciplines at Glasgow from 1641 until 1648.

While it is not the purpose of this paper to address the broad debate over the role of Beza in changing Calvin's thought immediately following his death, the specific case of On the Rights of Magistrates does provide a clear refutation of the above historiographical narrative. Specifically, Calvin's thought as it was expressed in The Institutes of the Christian Religion appears to have served as the fundamental framework around which Beza crafted his argument in On the Rights of Magistrates. In the realm of political theory, Calvin's understanding of the role of government and rulers is reflected in the explicit assumptions about government which Beza makes. Furthermore, Beza uses a number of theological concepts which mirror the theological focuses of the Institutes itself. Finally, Calvin bequeathed to Beza a series of practical rules for how different elements of the political order should relate to one another. Therefore, John Calvin's The Institutes must be seen as a crucial influence on Theodore Beza's On the Rights of Magistrates.

English translation of Ethica Christiana, ex sacris literis collecta (Herborn, 1610).

Georg Pasor (1570-1637) began teaching at the Herborn Academy in 1597, and was successively professor of Hebrew at Herborn (1607-1626) and Greek at the University of Franeker (1626-1637). He is famous for his Lexicon Graeco-Latinum (Herborn, 1619), which remained in print for over 150 years. While at Herborn he produced the work translated here. In this work, Pasor provides a sketch of Christian virtues and duties. The work is characterized both by voluminous biblical references and integration of philosophical virtues. This harmonization of biblical sources and philosophical virtues is seen not only in specific virtues such as justice, where Pasor approves the familiar Aristotelian division between distributive and commutative justice, but also on the title page itself, where Pasor states that James 1:22 agrees substantially with Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics 1.3.

EDITORIAL: The renaissance in Post-Reformation Reformed Scholasticism continues apace in Jae-Eun Park’s study of the Puritan Stephen Charnock’s Christological basis of our knowledge of God. While Charnock was accused by an earlier generation of scholars of being rationalistic, dry, arid, and abstract, Park demonstrates that this theologian’s understanding of human knowledge of the divine has been misunderstood because assessments have been based upon only one of his works, to the exclusion of another that elaborates on a Christological epistemology. Specifically, Park elucidates Charnock’s three-tiered epistemology with its natural, legal, and evangelical bases for human knowledge of God. God is ultimately and most fully revealed (à la Hebrews 1) in Christ Jesus. Additionally, Christ’s actual work of redemption plays a significant role in how we understand who God is; and finally, one who is familiar with and senses the importance of Christ’s work of redemption (with all its epistemological implications) will appropriately love, honor, cherish, and worship the Triune God. What we discover is that once again there is a wealth of theological treasure in the Reformed Scholastic troves of yore.

40 essays by Ronnie Hsia, Ulrich Leinsle, Marius Reiser, Thomas Marschler, Trent Pomplun, Jean-Louis Quantin, William O'Brien SJ, Stefania Tutino, Carl Trueman, Andreas Beck, Willem van Asselt, Eric Carlsson, Stephen Hampton, Benjamin Mayes, Robert Kolb, Risto Saarinnen, Ola Tjorholm, Sarah Mortimer, Jeff Bach, Keith Stanglin, Hartmut Lehmann, Jonathan Strom, Craig Atwood, Stephen Burnett, Emanuele Colombo, Aza Goudriaan, Carolina Armenteros, Eric Watkins, Maria Rosa Antognazza, Stephen Gaukroger, Jonathan Israel, John Henry.

G. W. Leibniz professes a commitment to historical Christian theism, but the depth and orthodoxy of his commitment has been questioned throughout the past three centuries. In this project I defend both the cogency and the orthodoxy of Leibniz’s philosophical theology and, by extension, its application to the Christian task of theodicy. At the heart of this defense is the central claim of this project, namely, that Leibniz’s philosophical theology represents a traditional brand of Augustinianism. In short, I argue that Leibniz’s theodicy is not his own, but is the tacit claim of a longstanding theological tradition made explicit and brought to bear on the problem of evil as articulated in Leibniz’s day. Accompanying this central claim are a number of subordinate claims, the most significant of which center on how we read Leibniz on providence and on free choice. Regarding the former, I argue that Leibniz’s understanding of providence has precedence in and is a recapitulation of older Augustinian views of the God-world relationship. As for free choice, I maintain that the Augustinian tradition is not only incompatiblist, or libertarian, but was recognized as such in Leibniz’s day. Hence in adhering to this tradition, Leibniz is knowingly adhering to a libertarian theology. I show that his adherence to this tradition and its views of freedom has significant textual support. My method of defense is both historical and constructive. On the historical side I focus primarily on contextual and textual analysis. However, insofar as this defense includes the viability of Leibniz’s theodicy for Christian theology and theodicy today, constructive engagement with Leibniz’s contemporary objectors and the current literature on the problem of evil is also required. Therefore, I devote the latter part of this defense to lingering objections and interlocution with current approaches to the problem of evil. In the end I conclude that Leibniz’s theodicy, when read in the light of the Augustinian tradition, is not only orthodox, cogent, and defensible, but is perhaps the most viable response to the problem of evil for traditional Christian theology, if not the inevitable response for a traditional Augustinian.

Drawing on largely unexamined works, including Baxter's Methodus Theologiae Christianae (1681) and manuscript treatises and correspondence, Sytsma discusses Baxter's response to mechanical philosophers on the nature of substance, laws of motion, the soul, and ethics. Analysis of these topics is framed by a consideration of the growth of Christian Epicureanism in England, Baxter's overall approach to reason and philosophy, and his attempt to understand creation as an analogical reflection of God's power, wisdom, and goodness, or vestigia Trinitatis. Baxter's views on reason, analogical knowledge of God, and vestigia Trinitatis draw on medieval precedents and directly inform a largely hostile, though partially accommodating, response to mechanical philosophy.

PDF includes TOC and Chapter 1.

In this essay, I examine Leibniz's 1686 essay "Necessary and Contingent Truths" in order to highlight the Augustinian roots of Leibniz's philosophical theology. My contention throughout is that Leibniz's philosophical theology, far from being innovative, represents a very traditional and orthodox brand of Augustinianism.

Uno de los importantes puntos de controversia en la interpretación de la Reforma protestante es el de la medida en que rompe o no con la tradición intelectual precedente. ¿Debe entenderse como un hito de quiebre que contribuye así a inaugurar el mundo moderno, o se trata más bien de una reforma dentro de una misma tradición medieval? Es esta disputa, en sus múltiples ramificaciones, la que es objeto de este libro.

Recent interpreters of John Owen incorrectly argue that Owen's trinitarian theology undermines the doctrine of inseparable operations (Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa). On the contrary, this article argues Owen upheld this doctrine like his Reformed Orthodox contemporaries, using the incarnation as a test case. Owen maintained the incarnation was an undivided act of the Trinity, which had its appropriative terminus on the Son alone – a pattern of thought he extended to the Spirit's work on the Son's humanity. Owen's creative use of the tradition is an example for contemporary theologians who would emphasize the Spirit's role in Christology.

Gijsbert van den Brink, Aza Goudriaan (eds.), Contemporary Perspectives on Reformed Orthodoxy. Reformed Confessions, Scholastic Thought, and Puritan Divinity in Post-Reformation Protestantism [Celebrating 500 Years since the Reformation, 1517-2017: Avant-première] (Oradea, Warsaw, Berlin, and Enschede: Emanuel University Press, De Gruyter Open, and Refo500, 2016).

There is a tradition in historiography of the Reformed tradition claiming that James Ussher's works were important sources used at the Westminster Assembly. This essay seeks to substantiate that tradition by examining contextual factors and the sources themselves to discover the many links between Ussher, the Westminster divines, and the documents produced by the Assembly.

This is is a working bibliography of primary and secondary sources on reason and philosophy in the Reformed tradition. The sources are primarily (1) theological evaluations of the nature and use of reason, or (2) theologians writing directly on philosophy. I have generally avoided the inclusion of primary sources on philosophy by Reformed philosophers. Updates to this file will be posted periodically.

À l’instar d’une bibliothèque privée qui reflète l’activité intellectuelle et les centres d’intérêt de son propriétaire, l’étude de la bibliothèque d’un établissement de formation révèle, elle aussi, l’activité intellectuelle ainsi que les écoles de pensée du corps professoral. La Bibliothèque de l’Académie de Lausanne illustre ce phénomène. Fondée durant les premières années de l’Académie, elle a pour but d’aider les professeurs et les pasteurs. Enseignants des arts libéraux, des langues anciennes, de la théologie et de la philosophie, adeptes des méthodes humanistes ou scholastiques, défenseurs des idées aristotéliciennes ou ramistes, partisans des doctrines zwingliennes ou calviniennes, les dynamiques intellectuelles de l’Académie au XVIe siècle se reflètent dans sa bibliothèque.

This essay attempts to argue that Turretin’s explanation of freedom differs from that of Scotus, and that Turretin’s concepts of necessity and indifference are also different from those of Scotus. Thus, it is not appropriate to call Turretin a Scotist regarding the doctrine of freedom. Turretin takes no heed of Scotus in his formulation of the doctrine of freedom. He follows the basic logic of the Aristotelian tradition. He appears to be a Scotist only because he endorses the typical Aristotelian logic, which is the basis of Scotus’ formulation of the doctrine of freedom. The Scotist ideas about necessity and indifference differ greatly from those of Turretin. Specifically, Turretin’s careful rejection of the notion of indifference in the doctrine of freedom distances him from Scotus. In sum, Turretin’s doctrine of freedom is not Scotist but Reformed.

“개혁파 신학자 튜레틴의 자유의지론은 중세신학자 스코투스와는 달라”
이 논문은 최근 네덜란드에서 안톤 보스를 중심으로 일어난 개혁파 자유의지론에 대한 새로운 해석을 다루고 있다. 보스와 그와 함께 활동하는 학자들에 따르면 개혁파 자유의지론은 중세 신학자 둔스 스코투스(1266-1308년)의 영향을 받아서 형성된 것이라고 한다. 하지만 이 논문은 그러한 해석을 반대하고, 개혁파 자유의지론은 개혁파 신학자들이 다양한 아리스토텔레스(주전 384-322년) 전통을 참조하고 자체적으로 해석하여 형성한 것임을 밝혔다.

'Reformed scholasticism' refers to a form of theology that is historically situated in the period from ca. 1560 to 1750. It is embedded in the confessional and institutional identity of churches emerging in the Reformed strand of Protestantism, while its texts are written in the distinctive genre of scholasticism. The basic pattern of scholastic discourse begins with a 'question' (quaestio), which clearly presents the issue under discussion. This is followed by arguments for and against certain positions in respect of the question, and finally by a solution by means of definitions and distinctions that respond to the various positions. This scholastic method is particularly suitable for instruction, inquiry and discussion at an academic level, and developed in diverse ways within different ecclesiastical contexts: Lutheran, Roman Catholic  and Reformed. While it is worth noting the structural similarities and vivid interaction between scholastic writers across confessional boundaries, this chapter focuses on the scholasticism typical of the era of 'Reformed orthodoxy' in which the confessional identity of the Reformed churches was being shaped, codified and institutionalised. The development of scholastic Reformed theology is sketched in its institutional context of the early modern universities. The different polemical frontiers against which Reformed doctrine was defended and explained are surveyed. The final section of this chapter points to the continuing relevance of scholastic thought for Reformed theology today.

Puritanism has often been strongly associated with the rise of modern science and philosophy. This essay provides evidence to the contrary that, at least during the period 1660-1680, several Puritans remained largely hostile to the “new philosophy” associated with René Descartes and Pierre Gassendi. An examination of select writings of the period from Richard Baxter, Robert Ferguson, and Samuel Gott demonstrates the prevalence of suspicion and critique of new philosophy among Puritans until at least 1680. After discussing the general relation of Puritanism to seventeenth-century philosophical transition, this essay highlights some common themes uniting the works of Baxter, Ferguson, and Gott. These three promote philosophical eclecticism, interpret the rise of problematic new philosophical concepts as a revival of ancient errors, and raise specific objections regarding theologically problematic implications of new philosophy.

Through an examination of the Nonconformist reception of Richard Baxter, this essay provides a window into theological transition within early modern Protestantism. I argue that, although Baxter excelled in knowledge of scholastic theology, integrated scholastic theology into his practical writings, and produced a great scholastic system of theology—the Methodus Theologiae Christianae (1681)—over the course of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, scholastic and philosophical aspects within Baxter’s corpus were ignored, downplayed, and even excised by Nonconformists who otherwise strongly sympathized with his writings. The modern focus on Baxter’s practical works and neglect of Baxter’s scholastic theology is due in large part to this later reception. The story of Baxter’s reception is, moreover, illustrative of a general shift in philosophical and theological orientation in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Nonconformity.

In this work Luther argues that Latomus’ work is essentially begging the question. His presuppositions are other than the Scriptures themselves, which of themselves are clear, necessary, authoritative, and sufficient. And therefore, Latomus has never understood and truly recognized the biblical words and concepts and experience of grace and sin, law and gospel, Christ and man. This is also demonstrated by Latomus’ discussion of penance and indulgences. Especially in these cases he is completely reliant on human writers. And this precisely shows that Scripture ought to be the primary source, whereby everything is measured. The Church, or the saints do not stand above Scripture. Therefore, according to Luther, scholastic theology “is nothing else than ignorance of the truth and a stumbling block in comparison to Scripture.” His advice has been “that a young man avoid scholastic philosophy and theology like the very death of his soul.”

English translation of Daniel Colonius (praes.), Positiones ethicae de virtue morali [resp. Petrus Reghemoorterus] (Leiden: Isaac Elzevier, 1622).

Daniel Colonius (1566-1635) is well known for his Analysis paraphrastica of Calvin's Institutes (1636). He studied at Geneva with Theodore Beza and was a participant at the Synod of Dordt (1618-1619). This is a short disputation representing an early seventeenth-century theologian's view of ethics. Colonius is clearly favorable toward virtue ethics and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics in particular.

English translation of Theses ex ethic. Arist. ad Nicom. de summo fine hominis (Geneva: Jacob Stoer, 1600).

Gaspard Laurent (1556-1636) was professor of Greek at Geneva from 1597. According to the 1559 statutes of the Academy, the Greek professor was tasked with explaining a philosophical book on ethics—“a book of Aristotle or Plato or Plutarch or of some Christian philosopher”. Laurent produced a number of ethical disputations, and among the first is the work translated here.. This disputation consists largely in an exposition of Aristotle on happiness from books I and X of Nicomachean Ethics.