An Orthodox Take on Scholasticism

 

The most distinctive mark of the new academic theology, however, was its method.  Known as scholasticism, this approach to understanding departed significantly from the theology of the old Christendom.

The Age of Division: Christendom from the Great Schism to the Protestant Reformation, by John Strickland

In this post, we will get a consideration of the scholastics from the viewpoint of at least one Christian Orthodox scholar.  It might also help shed some light on how Orthodox Christians consider natural law, although this is not directly discussed by the author.

The West in the twelfth century would see the rise of the university system, with learning entrusted to a professional intellectual class.  This was a change from earlier practice, where learning was in the hands of bishops and monks.

Taking a lead would be the Dominicans and the Franciscans.  The Dominicans especially were charged with teaching against heresy.  Papal charters were the prerequisites for the universities, and great examples were to be found in Bologna, Paris, and Oxford.

Unlike the stereotype where the Church was said to stand in the way of science and learning, Pope Gregory IX issued a bull in 1231 in defense of scholarly autonomy, granting the University of Paris the right to establish its curricula free from interference by the bishops.

And here we come to scholasticism: instead of accepted tradition – that which is handed down – it subjected tradition to rigorous logical tests; it was assumed a higher understanding of faith would result.  It also risked a departure from tradition.

Strickland would point to Anselm of Canterbury as perhaps the first Latin doctor to turn on its head the idea that reason follows faith when it comes to the mystery of knowing God.  It came about during a controversy regarding the Eucharist.  Lanfanc, Anselm’s predecessor, would defend against the notion, offered by Berenger, that the consecrated bread could not also be the deified body of Christ in heaven. 

Lanfanc would defend this using Aristotelian logic.  For the first time, two theologians would argue about a mystery purely in terms of grammar and dialectic.  Berenger would be forced to retract his views, and the document offered in conclusion had the effect of endorsing Aristotelian rationalism.

Strickland would comment on Anslem’s work, Proslogian:

…Anselm’s famous treaties was an effort at demonstrating the existence of God on purely rational grounds.  Not on a single page, not in a single sentence does the name of Jesus Christ ever appear.

A further example is given of Abelard and his work Yes and No, “a dialectical reflection on the Christian faith.”  Intended as an Aristotelian-styled intellectual exercise for his students, it encouraged a cerebral approach to theology.

Should this be as troubling to me as it appears to be for Strickland?  It is not.  No, I don’t think it is possible to climb to God from the bottom – completely through natural theology.  But there is and can be no disagreement between faith and reason, as God is the author of both.  God has given man the faculty of reason; is it not appropriate for man to use reason to explore and understand God?

Also, this verse comes to mind:

1 Peter 3: 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.

The Greek word is apologian.  An apologia: a reason, a justification.  Perhaps, from the viewpoint of the Eastern Church, any attempt to intellectualize the Christian life and calling leads one away from the Christian life and calling.  For the purposes of this post and blog, this issue is secondary; I am focused on tracing the history, and in this specific post, perhaps getting a glimpse, indirectly, into the Orthodox view of Thomistic natural law.

Time to Strike

 

I will stop the motor of the world.

-          John Galt

If it wasn’t painfully obvious way back in February 2020, that – unlike the novel that brought us John Galt – the businessmen of the world were never going to be the ones to stop the crushing of humanity, it certainly is clear today.

Following every edict, enforcing every draconian policy, eliminating all unapproved comment, playing the role of the tyrannical state.  This has been the path taken by big business (and, unfortunately big churches – especially those under an institutional umbrella).

And now, dozens, if not hundreds, of companies are announcing vaccine mandates for their employees.  These range from tech giants in Silicon Valley, to mega-banks in New York, to travel service, restaurants, and others. 

----------------------------------

I have noticed something not unexpected over the last several weeks.  Dozens of help-wanted signs, signing bonuses, interview bonuses.  Labor shortages everywhere.  Even the most basic jobs – fast food, grocery stores, etc.  At the same time, long lines due to lack of staff.  Empty tables in the restaurant, with wait times of an hour solely due to lack of staff.  Dozens of people at the check-out line, with a dozen lines empty due to lack of staff.

It is a continuation of the disruption caused by shutting down supposedly “non-essential” businesses.  As if this could be centrally planned to avoid long term consequences.  It is a continuation of the disruption caused by paying people more not to work than they could earn by working. 

It is a continuation of the disruption caused by spending trillions of dollars to increase demand while paying billions to purposely-unemployed workers to decrease supply.

For the latest example:

American Airlines Group Inc. and Spirit Airlines Inc. canceled nearly 700 more flights Tuesday, stranding thousands of passengers and stoking concerns that crew shortages are adding to problems that initially were caused by weather and technology issues.

Data reviewed by the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American aviators, showed that out of 284 American flights grounded as of midmorning Tuesday, over 222 were attributed to pilot issues, said Dennis Tajer, spokesman for the union. “That’s unsatisfactory. That’s unacceptable.”

----------------------------------

If you believe the state, there remain about 30% today that have not taken at least one jab.  Something between 20% - 25% of Americans say they will refuse the vaccine (that’s not really a vaccine); they say that they will never take it.  Many of these, inherently, work at the companies threatening them: take the jab or lose your job.

----------------------------------

So, I think about the long lines at restaurants, airports, grocery stores, etc.  I think about the shortages in industry – the chip shortage in automotive is most famous.  I think about the massive prices increases for commodities of all sorts due to shortages.

And I think maybe it is time to strike.  Maybe the 20% - 25% of those who will never take the jab need to take a week off from work, all at the same time.  Make it clear that this will be the permanent condition if the mandates go into effect.

----------------------------------

There are some industries where this will be irrelevant – industries located primarily on either coast, like banking and tech; too many true believers, and a service industry can better handle temporary disruptions. 

But there are many industries where this will be tremendously disruptive, those with facilities located throughout much of what is labeled flyover country.  Industries that have to deliver product every hour of every day: manufacturing, chemical, industrial, food production, travel, etc.

The Words of the Prophets

 

Two weeks to flatten the curve….

Brilliant scientists expected 100,000,000 cases accruing within 4 weeks in the USA (^{Hains, 2020}). …However, as of June 18 [2020], the total fatalities are ∼450,000 with median age ∼80 and typically multiple comorbidities.

-          Forecasting for COVID-19 has failed, John P.A. Ioannidis, Sally Cripps, and Martin A. Tanner; published at US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health

-----------------------------------------------

Deuteronomy 18: 20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken?

22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

The last eighteen months has seen a multitude of false prophets, some speaking in the name of God, many speaking in the names of other gods.  God offers that the fate of both is the same: the prophet that speaks presumptuously, that is without God’s authority, shall die. 

The one who speaks prophecies that do not come to pass, whether spoken in God’s name or in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.

Further, we are not to be afraid of that prophet.

-----------------------------------------------

Predictions for hospital and ICU bed requirements were also entirely misinforming. Public leaders trusted models (sometimes even black boxes without disclosed methodology) inferring massively overwhelmed health care capacity (Table 1) (^{IHME COVID-19 health service utilization forecasting team & Murray, 2020}). However, very few hospitals were eventually stressed and only for a couple of weeks. Most hospitals maintained largely empty wards, expecting tsunamis that never came.

-----------------------------------------------

1 John 4: 4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

We have been inundated by these false prophets, in a seemingly never-ending series of doom and cataclysm.  And it never gets better, even with hints of positive news, even with evidence of wildly exaggerated risks.

-----------------------------------------------

Matthew 7: 15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 (a) Ye shall know them by their fruits.

The fruits of a true prophet would be accurate prophecies; the fruits of a false prophet would be failed prophecies.

-----------------------------------------------

The prophecy:

To stave off a catastrophe, New York might need up to 140,000 hospital beds and as many as 40,000 intensive care units with ventilators.

The reality:

But the number of intensive care beds being used declined for the first time in the crisis, to 4,908, according to daily figures released on Friday. And the total number hospitalized with the virus, 18,569, was far lower than the darkest expectations.

The prophecy:

Last Friday, the model suggested Tennessee would see the peak of the pandemic on about April 19 and would need an estimated 15,500 inpatient beds, 2,500 ICU beds and nearly 2,000 ventilators to keep COVID-19 patients alive.

The Unnatural Novelty

 

It is not natural to see man as a natural product. It is not common sense to call man a common object of the country or the seashore. It is not seeing straight to see him as an animal. It is not sane. It sins against the light; against that broad daylight of proportion which is the principle of all reality.

The Everlasting Man, G.K. Chesterton (ebook)

When the man of science considers the history of man, he begins with evolution – a slow, and soothing process, reflecting gradual change.  Chesterton considers this not a practical word or a profitable idea.  Nobody can explain how nothing turned into something, or how something turned into something else.

It is really far more logical to start by saying ‘In the beginning God created heaven and earth’ even if you only mean ‘In the beginning some unthinkable power began some unthinkable process.’

It is at least as rational, isn’t it?  It explains, frankly much more believably, than does the idea of “give me the big bang and I can explain the rest” (which even that they cannot do, but what of the big bang?).  The answer to this is, and will remain, a religious question.  What do scientists say?  The more we know, the more we know what we don’t know.  There isn’t progress toward an answer in that.

Neither history nor science can tell us of the origin of the universe, the origin of life, or the origin of man – the latter being a very unique form of life.  “Man is not merely an evolution but rather a revolution.”  That he has a backbone like birds or fish really tells us nothing of man – nothing meaningful, at least.

Chesterton offers as example the cave man.  Not in Plato’s cave; this one is the cave and cave man of history.  The stereotype tells us that he knocks the woman on the head before taking her to his cave.  But what evidence of such a thing do we have?  And why on earth would a woman wait to get knocked on the head?  Were cave women not interested in the benefits of a mate – food, protection, shelter?

The evidence we do have is something quite different.  It exists in the cave: there are not the skeletons of clubbed women, crushed skulls lined up in a row like bowling balls; nothing of the sort.  There is, however, art – drawings and paintings of animals, drawn in some real detail and with some real understanding.

In this and twenty other details it is clear that the artist had watched animals with a certain interest and presumably a certain pleasure.  In that sense it would seem that he was not only an artist but a naturalist; the sort of naturalist who is really natural.

To the extent there is any character at all in the evidence found regarding the cave man, it is a human character – even a humane character.  There is real evidence of such mild and innocent things; there is no evidence of the brute, clubbing women on the head.

But what is the point?  What is Chesterton driving at?  The point is found in the question: Where is the cave man of crude evolution, he asks?  The missing link, so to speak. 

Are these, perhaps, pictures on the wall of a child’s bedroom, decorated just as we do today?  That seems more likely than attributing these to a club-wielding woman-beater.  Had someone said that St. Francis of Assisi had drawn the pictures out of a love for animals, everyone would have nodded in understanding.  So, why not of the cave man?

Further: while there is to be found the picture of the reindeer drawn by the cave man, where is the picture of the cave man drawn by the reindeer?  The bird claw or the fin of a fish – where is the art from these?  Did monkeys begin to draw, with man eventually putting on the final touches? 

That is the simplest lesson to learn in the cavern of the coloured pictures; only it is too simple to be learnt. It is the simple truth that man does differ from the brutes in kind and not in degree; and the proof of it is here; that it sounds like a truism to say that the most primitive man drew a picture of a monkey, and that it sounds like a joke to say that the most intelligent monkey drew a picture of a man.

The distance between man and every other living being on earth is so extreme; would not evolution have provided beings to fill in these gaps?  Where is the proof?

Seeds of Modernity?

 

The Papal Reformation had altered forever the character of the West.

The Age of Division: Christendom from the Great Schism to the Protestant Reformation, by John Strickland

This reformation occurred during the second half of the eleventh century, spanning the time from the election of Pope Leo IX to the death of Pope Gregory VII.  One must keep in mind the chaos that was Europe and the papacy in the century preceding this: the case of Emperor Otto III at the end of the tenth century; invasions by Vikings, Magyars, Saracens; the Cadaver Synod at the end of the ninth century.

Europe was a mess, the papacy corrupt, the Church corrupted by the nobles.  These realities cannot be discounted when considering Strickland’s views on the downsides to Christendom brought on by such reforms.

A sampling of the reforms, per Strickland: kings ordered to defend the papacy (yet, to what extent could a pope “order” a king, when the king had the military might); soldiers mobilized to extend the reach of the Latin Church; universities founded; and, inquisitions were held.  A mixed bag here, at least how I see it – like many human endeavors even those led by men of goodwill.

In this mix, the Great Schism.  Whereas Christendom (East and West) had grown by humility and repentance and revealed the presence of paradise in this world, in the West paradise and this world were now split in two.

And, on this, I must again refer to a couple of thoughts: the intrigue in the Byzantine court can easily match anything that occurred in the West – either by the papacy or in the position of the western emperor.  Further, the East had lost significant territory and significant numbers of the faithful to Muslim military advances, while the West turned the tide and stopped these Muslim advances both in France (eventually driving Muslims out of Spain) and in southeastern Europe; how to balance humility and also be prepared to defend one’s own has been and remains a difficult issue for Christians and Christendom.

Returning to Strickland: in the West, Christianity transformed to an instrument for engineering a new order:

This was not, to be sure, a secular utopia.  As we shall see, the kingdom of heaven remained its standard of cultural integrity.  But with its instrumental approach to Christianity, it set the West on a course toward modernity.

How did it set the West on this course?  Strickland explains that these changes would subvert the idea of heavenly immanence.  God was no longer working directly in the Church – “Church” being understood as the entire body of believers.  Instead, given the two cities (man and God) and the two classes – cloister and castle – the West attempted to limit God to work only through the Church as the institution. 

An ecclesiological culture thus arose in which heavenly immanence was no longer intrinsic to the divine-human body of Christ.  It was now extrinsically mediated through the clerical – that is human – establishment.

Which, it seems, is one of the things that the Protestant Reformation would come to address.  And I don’t mean to comment on the theological viewpoints, only to try and draw out how such events have impacted later – sometimes centuries later – events.

Strickland returns to the Eastern (and before the eleventh century, Christendom’s) idea of Symphony, described as assigning to “Christian rulers the responsibility of working in harmony with bishops for the good of the Church.”

But it could be violated if the ruler placed earthly priorities before those of the Church.

And, if so, who or what would place a check on the ruler?

The Sons of Disobedience

 

…the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.

Paraphrase from Ephesians 2:2

It is not difficult to imagine that we have entered one more dark history of humanity on a long string of dark histories.  I want to say that others have suffered much worse, and they have.  We can think of those in the path of Genghis Khan; the early Christians under Rome; medieval Europeans under siege by Vikings, Huns, or Charlemagne; almost anyone in France in the late eighteenth century; Armenians in the Ottoman Empire; those living in between Germany and the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1940s; Chinese under Mao; Vietnamese under napalm; Arabs under drones.

But I think I am on safe ground to consider that never before in the recorded history of humanity has the entire population of the world been under siege simultaneously and placed in a medical experiment, forced to face the risk of early death regardless of the path chosen.  All of humanity; one-hundred percent.  More than seven billion people.

Ephesians 6: 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

These sons of disobedience, are they merely ghosts?  Or do they walk among us, flesh and blood?  Certainly, as the Apostle Paul writes, they are in the heavenly places, but he also writes that they are world forces.  We find this reality elsewhere:

1 Peter 5: 8(b) Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

The Apostle Peter doesn’t say he is floating, coming only in a dream to fill our heads with evil thoughts.  He prowls, like a lion; he devours – a physical act. 

Jesus furthers this idea that they walk among us, on the surface quite religious and devout.  He says to the Pharisees:

John 8: 44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Those to whom Jesus is speaking are the sons of disobedience; the sons of their father, the devil.  They want to do the devil’s work.  We see them on television daily; they fill every major outlet.  Their father was a murderer from the beginning, and they want to do his work.  We also have come to see them in positions of church leadership, bowing in obedience to the sons of disobedience, speaking lies as their father does.  They are doing their father’s work and teaching others that they also must do their father’s work.

One of the paths I have taken at this blog is a significant examination of the many false histories we have been taught, the lies used to justify action, the way evil was described as virtuous.  When I began that journey, I was already somewhat skeptical of the narrative; as I worked through that journey, I have come to conclude that everything being described to us about meaningful events in our history is a lie.

The sons of disobedience always lie, because their father always lies.  It is in their nature because it is their father’s nature.  Every major event in my lifetime (and for centuries before this) has been based on a lie or explained away by a lie. 

For this reason, I didn’t believe for a minute that we faced a plague of medieval proportions (see my earliest thoughts here, here, and here – all from March 2020).  I didn’t need to have a complete answer of the truth; just that I knew what we were being told was a lie.

When Private Property Isn’t

  

My comment, at the Mises site:

[From the author of the piece]: "This does not mean that someone cannot be prevented from accessing certain venues or activities when their rightful owners set preventive sanitary rules...."

BM: Libertarians must really get past this kind of thinking. Does anyone believe that airlines, social media companies, mainstream media companies, any large company of any type is a private company in any meaningful sense? How quickly and suddenly they bow to government dictates no matter how draconian, and what punishment will befall them if they don't. Willingly or through coercion, they do the state's bidding.

The piece was about forced vaccinations.

There is much about private property that isn’t private.  At one extreme – consider it the closest to a libertarian ideal: we have property, acquired via voluntary transaction; either produced from other materials, acquired in trade, developed in code, etc.  Yet, even at this extreme, try not paying property tax on the property, or income tax on the privately earned income, etc.  The property isn’t purely private in the sense of the owner have complete control over use and disposition.

At the other extreme…libertarians and Austrian economists will use the phrase “crony capitalism.”  If this phrase is to mean anything, it has to indicate that the private property (necessary for a system of capitalism) has not been earned or acquired in a manner that fits the above definition of private property: acquired via voluntary transaction.  Instead, it has been “earned” via government connection.

Examples of this abound: perhaps the most obvious is banking, especially money center banks.  Others include military contractors, pharmaceutical companies, airlines, tech and social media companies, mainstream media, etc.  It could also include any company or industry that petitions the state for something (as opposed to petitioning the state to not do something or to stop doing something).

These crony capitalist companies do the state’s bidding.  They lobby for funds, lobby for regulations, and in exchange, they pay the piper by dancing to his tune.  They realize the consequences of just saying no.  Why do such a thing, when saying yes pays so well?  Can the property that results from such an arrangement be described as “private”?

There is a large area in between, of course.  The most unfortunate, and taken from the last sixteen months: any church or small business that did not enforce or abide by state mandates faced the potential of being crushed, and its pastor or owner faced prison.  One cannot call this property “private,” though through no transgression of the owner.

But the entities that hold property via crony-capitalism can in no way be considered holders of private property.  They are extensions of the state, really not much different than the military, department of (in)justice, the various spy agencies, etc.

Conclusion

Libertarians really need not make the caveat, as was done in the statement I cited at the opening of this post.  Instead, the proper caveat should be that much of what is considered private property isn’t. 

Until this is fully embraced and understood, well…we are like the dupe, falling for the con of the shell game.  Complain about government encroachment and defend the so-called private entities that are just as much a means of that encroachment as any government employee.  Yes, such libertarians may be following the right shell, but there is a second one virtually equally as dangerous to liberty.