The biblical doctrine of creation and the Via

Moderna

The biblical doctrine of creation is unique; no religion other than those developed out of the biblical tradition contains anything like it. In the biblical doctrine God is completely discontinuous with the world. The world, on the other hand, is completely dependent on God; it continues to exist by his continuing will for it to exist. Its unity is in his will or purpose and not an intrinsic property. Its order is, therefore, in no way binding on God. The complete freedom of God with respect to the whole creation was a fundamental influence on late medieval thought. The doctrine of creation also, by its emphasis on the direct relationship of God to each creature, produced that awareness of reality that corresponded to and supported nominalism in medieval thought. The order of the world was not eternally inherent in it but was imposed on it from outside by the transcendent God. Particular creatures of God were neither universal nor necessary. Human knowledge of the world had, therefore, to be knowledge of particular creatures in a contingent and dynamic world, could not be deduced from universal cosmic truths, and could never arrive at absolute certainty. God’s relation to his creatures supported nominalism. It was a meaningful world, but it was absolutely subordinated to the free, creative action of God; it was God’s purposes that gave it meaning, for the world had no purpose of its own. It was an ordered world because God had ordered it, but the world’s order could be known only by observing to see how God had chosen to order it. The best of the fourteenth-century theologians and philosophers were pursuing the matter to the end, and the end was not a post-medieval emancipation from Christianity, but a Christian emancipation from Aristotle. The late scholastics concentrated on the problem of our knowledge of the world and in so doing they defined and refined that cast of mind which allowed the West, and only the West, to break through the closed systems of cosmological thought to the development of modern science. — Paraphrased from Willis B. Glover, Biblical Origins of Modern Secular Culture  - The Glover Thesis on the Origins of Modernity

Where we are now

Christian approaches to culture can be divided according to a pragmatic criterion into those with and those without backbone. We can say of those without backbone that they are further characterized, for most part, by being “mere” and Greek. This immediately suggests C. S. Lewis and the rest of Oxford Christianity. In his case the Greek was Platonism, and “mere” was his own label for what he was doing. This approach to culture always suggests people in clerical collars, aesthetes, academics, and generally people ensconced in the genteel side of life. The combination of Greek and high church can also take on a Thomist expression. Culture with a backbone generally goes back to Francis Schaeffer. Behind Schaeffer, of course, was Cornelius Van Til. But despite his nephew’s book (The Calvinistic Concept of Culture), Van Til’s interest in culture was limited to philosophy. In fact, Van Til was the deep source behind the R2K ejection of culture from Christian concern. But Van Til’s followers were the ones who did much of the basic work of laying out the foundations for a specifically and exclusive Christian approach to culture. In doing so they dipped into the various neo-calvinist Dutch sources that were also in Van Til’s background. Van Til’s immediate influence was on the Presbyterian clergy he trained, and without these followers his influence would have stayed there. Now, however, Van Til’s influence seems to be waning. The new challenger is Thomism. The impact on cultural theology of this new type of Thomism is still diffuse. It has come out of the without backbone camp, and it appeals to those who can ignore the social and political component of Thomism. This contingent is joined by swarms of graduates from papist diploma mills, and from older professors who sense the need to join something different which they see as still enjoying credit. As Thomism denies a specifically Christian basis for culture, yet holds out hope for enhancing a Christian view of things, it is ideal for this camp. Yet, Thomism has also made its way into the camp of those with backbone, as seen with Stephen Wolfe’s The Case for Christian Nationalism. In both cases we still see the desire to build a cultural theology on a philosophical base, one where a cult-like guru orientation predominates. The theoretical side of approaches to Christian culture is sill bad. It looks like we cannot yet hope for maturity in this matter. We recently published a critique of both schools, Divided Knowledge: Van Til & Traditional Apologetics. The main portion of the book examines what the Thomist academic doctors have to say about Van Til.

How we got here

The Via Moderna was highest achievement of the branch of medieval thought that rejected the Thomist Greek-Christian synthesis. It was set aside by early modern theologians in favor of rationalist alternatives that promised immanent certainty, but in the end discredited themselves.

Philosophy and theology

Essays and book reviews on historical and contemporary philosophical and theological topics. Historical Studies History is like testimony in court. It is told to make a case. But it also part of the mass media of textbook publishing, and the often ideology driven academic world. A history book has to be bought by libraries or adopted as a college text to make it into the cultural consciousness. The independent reviewer is critical to breaking through this control.

Law and Political Theory

The church under the papacy, and civil governments took form by asserting themselves through law, and early protestants took to legal theory to defend themselves against hostile regimes. Liberalism created itself through theories of law and rights.

Modernity

The trial of modernity – who or what is on trial? It is the contrived solutions of the past based on compromise and the synthesis of incompatible beliefs.