Roger Olsons A Story of Christian Theology
Olson observed that most Christians disregard the secondary source of the Christian story as presented and influenced by theologians over the centuries. This book was created to fill in the gap in terms of what Christians were aware of in the construction of the Christian story. Olson described the gap to begin at the end of the New Testament and the conclusion was found in the lives and ministries of the apostles and contemporary Christianity.
According to Olson, God continued to move to author the story of Christianity more than two thousand years after Christ died on the cross for mankind. During that time, God has been leading his people towards a better understanding of the truth. Olson posited, Theology is just that --- faith seeking understanding of Gods truth.
Part I Conflicting Christian Visions in the 2nd Century
Olson described the story of Christian theology to begin after Jesus Christ walked the earth and all his apostles and disciples have died. Instead, Christian theology was viewed as the churchs reflection for the salvation of Christ and on the gospel. The pivotal point for Christian theology was witnessed in the death of John the Beloved, wherein a new era for Christianity emerged. There was no longer any apostle alive to settle doctrinal or other disputes due to the absence of eyewitness of Jesus or people who were closely connected to his ministry. When the apostles were alive, there was no need for theology.
Theology was born as their heirs of the apostles began to reflect on Jesus and the apostles teachings to explain it in new contexts and situations and to settle controversies about Christian belief and conduct.
The Christians during that time regarded the apostolic writings to be significant, but it was not yet considered to be Scripture. The New Testament was originally known as a canon of Christian Scripture. However, during the second century apostolic writings became more special, as Christian church fathers began to quote them as Scripture. However, there was no single church or region that had a complete set of apostolic writings. The search to compile writings that were genuinely written by apostles provided to be difficult and controversial. The need to provide the written record and interpretation of Jesus teachings and apostolic writings began the process of compiling Christian Scripture in the second century. During that time, the first Christian theologians were the bishops. These were leaders that were known as apostolic fathers because they were men who knew one or more of the apostles but were not apostles themselves.
Olson described the story of Christian theology to begin after Jesus Christ walked the earth and all his apostles and disciples have died. Instead, Christian theology was viewed as the churchs reflection for the salvation of Christ and on the gospel. Apostolic Christianity in the second century was faced with conflicts against Gnostics, Montanus, Montanists and anti-Christian orator Celsus.
Gnosticism was described as the generic label for Christian teachers and schools that existed on the fringes of early church and became a problem for Christian leaders. They did not believe that Christ did not become incarnate of Jesus but appeared to be human only. They believed that the body was an evil tomb for the human spirit, which was essentially divine nature that was an offshoot of Gods own being. They viewed Christ to be immaterial, a spiritual messenger sent from the unknown intended to bring home the stray sparks of his own being that were trapped in material bodies.
Despite the fact that Gnosticism was the greatest danger, they were also concerned about the Montanism. This movement rejected the growing belief in the special authority of the bishops and for apostolic writings. He considered the churches and the leaders to be spiritually dead and called for new prophecy. Like the Gnostics, Montanism attacked Christianity but it allowed for church leaders to respond theologically to the issues. Early Christian responded to Gnosticism vigorously.
The first group that responded to the heretics where the apostolic fathers, who were described to know the apostles personally or lived a part of their life at the same time as the apostles. They served as important links to the time of the apostles during a period of transition at the end of the first century. Olson gave time to give honor to the role of prominent apostolic fathers and their contributions to the story of Christian theology.
Polycarp was a very important second-century figure for Christians, who was bishop that was publicly executed by the Roman authorities in 155. He was noted to be important because of his relationship to the disciple John. He was tutored in faith by John and served as the living link with the disciples of Jesus. Thus, he was considered as one of the best authorities when it came to what the apostles taught and how they led the churches. Church historians listed eight to 10 authors and anonymous documents in the category. Apostolic fathers were significant writings from Second Letter of Clement, the Martyrdom of Polycarp and the Epistle to Diognetus and fragments of writings by Papias.
Clement of Rome also wrote to the Corinthian church because of the quarreling among the Christians, just like the reason why Paul wrote to them. He urged them to remain strong and true to their faith. While Paul pointed out the union in one Spirit and baptism in the faith in Christ, Clement ordered them to obey the bishop that God appointed over them. On the other hand, an unknown author wrote the Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. It was discovered in 1873 and discussed about Christian morality and instruction. It contained piece of advice and instructions for Christian living, spirituality and worship. It was known for the dualistic vision it provides, including the way of life and the way of death.
Olson described other apostolic fathers and writings, as well as their contributions to Christian theology. Their messages focused on severely moralistic and conduct-centered teachings, rather than mercy and salvation. Instead of considering them to be heretics, Olson pointed out the significance of these work because of the rampant rejection of law and commandments among Christians. While apostolic fathers were writing to Christians to instruct them in right belief and conduct, Apologists were writing against pagan critics and Roman authorities to defend Christianity against misconceptions and persecutions.
The enterprise of apologetic defense was not new in light of Greek philosophy. In fact, Alexandrian Christians were open to the task of explaining the Bible and Christian beliefs in a philosophical manner. Apologists like Justin, Athenagoras, and Theophilus were described to have an ambiguous legacy in Christian theology. Nevertheless, they provided significant contributions to it through ways of initial reflection on the important Christian beliefs about God and Jesus, as well as laying down the foundation for full-fledged doctrine about the Trinity.
Furthermore, Olson discussed the contributions of Ireneaus in exposing and fighting heresies. Ireneaus became the bishop of the Christians in Lyons and spend time fighting the growing influence of Gnosticism. He was noted to add the first story of a superstructure to the foundation of Christian theology. He was instrumental in defeating Gnostic thought and became the first Christian thinker that provided comprehensive theories about original sin and redemption. Irenaeus theory of redemption was a significant part of his contribution, which also served as an alternative to the vision of Gnosticism. He sought to show that the gospel of salvation taught by the apostles was centered upon incarnation of the Son of God.
Part II 3rd Century Tensions and Transformations
The secondary century witnessed numerous changes in the doctrines about God and salvation. The overall trend of Christian theology throughout this century was marked with diversion and digression from the message of Jesus and the apostles in the development of the messages new contexts. The first group of theologians presented the Gospel according to a message of morality. They introduced ideas about bishops and sacraments that seemed to be foreign to the spirit of the New Testament.
On the other hand, the second group Christian theologians were apologists. They explained Christian worldview and lifestyle to powerful leaders of the Roman Empire in an intelligible way. However, they tend to adopt Greek ways of thinking and speaking about God for biblical and apostolic teachings. However, some Christian thinkers of the third century and would protest this amalgam of biblical and Greek thought and accuse it of illegitimate syncretism --- the mixing of foreign elements into an unstable compound. The end of the second century witnessed the rise of true constructive theology with the great Irenaeus. Furthermore, his concept of salvation served as a recapitulation that stepped beyond the delineation in Scripture.
At the close of the second century, there was a new epoch of theology that emerged. The focus of geography and culture shifted to North Africa. Out of the cities from North Africa emerged Alexandria and Carthage, who became great third century defenders, interpreters and organizers of Christian thought and life. Modern western Christians were surprised that Africa produced most of the greatest Christian thinkers and elders, in comparison Europe.
Origen of Alexandria was known of the first early Christian father and theologian. Similar to his mentor, Clement of Alexandria, he speculated and surpassed him in his attempt to provide a construct of synthesizing Greek philosophy and biblical wisdom as a part of the grand system of Christian thought. While he was known to be a renowned scholar who defended prophetic and apostolic teachings as the touchstone of all truth, he was also accused of deviating from the teachings of orthodox Christian doctrines. Even if he was known as one of the most important theologians in the history of Christianity, he was never canonized as a saint and his memory was marred by suspicions of heresy, as well as posthumous condemnation. One of the accusations against him was his teaching that human souls preexisted their descent into bodies.
Olson gave space to discuss about Origens doctrine of God and described it as one of the most highly developed and complex in the history of Christian theology. However, he also noted that it could be both profound and confusing. God was considered as a point of debate between Christian intellectuals and Greek Roman intellectuals. The latter rejected Christian teachings about divinity and called them primitive and contradictory. While Origen was not the first Christian to defend the doctrine of God, he was the first to provide an account of the belief of God that could be sustained. He was never tired of affirming and asserting that there were certain terms the absolute divinity of the Logos or the Word, who became Jesus Christ, as the eternal and equal God the Father.
Nevertheless, he was accused to repeatedly falling into the trap of subordinationism --- the tendency to reduce the Logos into something less than the Father. The Holy Spirit was neglected if not almost actually ignored.
Olson noted that Cyprian was a person who was usually overlooked and briefly noted in the surveys of church history and historical theology. His contribution was not based on a completely new idea or the synthesis of divine revelation. Instead, it was more in the ideas about leadership and actual personal leadership. The context of the church during those times was infested by persecution, strife, schism and heresy within Christianity. Cyprian stepped forward in a time of persecution and presented a style of Christian leadership, which became the norm for catholic and orthodox churches for decades to centuries to come.
Cyprian was significant in the story of Christian theology was in the innovation he presented between ecclesiology and soteriology between the doctrine the church and salvation. The linkage was based on the office of the bishop. What he did was clear up the confusion and provided a set of guidelines that could unify all congregations, ministers, and individual Christian believers about the role of bishops. This resulted in the formation of Catholic ecclesiology.
This section of the book discussed about a major episode in Christian theology wherein there was a transformation of the Christian religion from a disunited, spiritual-pneumatic and virtually underground sect within the Roman Empire, into a highly organized, hierarchal, visible institution by the end of the third century. Olson described three main developments that promoted the transformation of the early Christianity, which included the formalization of the hierarchy of its organizational structure based on officiation of bishops, the formulation of creeds the summarized the essential doctrines for Christian beliefs, and the identification of a canon of Christian Scriptures. Furthermore, the Christians also held the apostles to have a special status and authority to teach, correct and settle disputes. The first in many steps that were taken to show the formalization of this religion was the emergence of the authority of bishops and the gathering of bishops referred to as synods.
Part III The Controversy about the Trinity
This section discussed about the controversy about the doctrine of the Trinity. During the fourth century, Olson described Christian theology to have surprising twists and turns. This century was characterized by the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity. He furthermore associated the story of theology in this particular period to be closely related to the story of the empire. During that time, Olson estimated that about five percent of the citizens in Rome were Christians. This period marked the survival of Christians amidst bloody persecution. When Constantine became emperor, he issued the Edict of Milan, which declared the imperial toleration of Christianity. This was the beginning of a series of edicts that restored the properties of Christians and gradually began to favor this religion over other religions. Constantine never instituted Christianity as the official religion of the country and he even remained as the high priest of the official pagan religion until his baptism before he died in 337.
Olson described the riot in Alexandria in 318 that broke out between Christians over a point of theology. This was an argument led by the bishop Alexander and the Presbyterian Arius. The latter led a small-scale rebellion against the bishop when the bishop preached something that he considered close to the heresy of Sabellianism, which reduced the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to mere names and aspects of the divine person, God. Arius led a full-blown theological and ecclesiastical war between them and their followers.
Arius followed Origen closely. He also affirmed that the Logos was subordinated to the Father. However, Christians were trained to view the eternal equality of the Logos with the Father. Origen believed that Logos was less than the Father. Oslon described that despite the clash between Arius and Alexander over the nature of Logos, they both had something in common. Both sides assumed that the divinity is ontologically perfect that would not change at all because God is divine and absolutely perfect.
Olson described the defense of Alexander for responding to Arius criticism despite the notably slight difference, In either case God himself has not united with humanity and therefore we are not saved (divinized) by the union. Our very salvation is at stake. However, Arius viewed things in the same vein. However, there was a significant difference in the way they viewed the nature of Jesus. Alexander assumed the orthodox view of salvation based on Irenaeus teachings. Arianism was a heretic worldview because it affected the Sons identity.
Olson also discussed the significance of the Council of Nicaea. During that time, Roman authorities fiercely persecuted bishops and Christian leaders. The Christian church was under an overall negative light. The Nicene Creed was a product of the trend of writing a creed that summarized and unified the faith of the church in as few words as possible.
Alexander, the Alexandrian bishop, groomed Athanasius to argue against the Arians heretical views about the Triune God. He was even forced into exile, at one point in his life, because of his steadfast defense of the key terminology that were used in the Nicene Creed against the contradiction of the imperial authorities. Olson noted that he was known as the saint of stubbornness because of his unyielding position on the creed against Arianism, even when authorities threatened his life. Even if his later positions could be considered to be heretical, he never experienced the condemnation that Origen experienced. He was known to be single-minded and inflexible, even for the sake of ecclesiastical unity. However, he was also appreciated as one of the greatest theologians of Alexandria. Olson compared him to Martin Luther, as they both experienced the win of social and doctrinal conflict and turmoil and stood his ground for truth.
With all the controversies that were created from Arian and Sabellian heresies, the second ecumenical council of the Christian church was noted to put finishing touches on the Nicene Creed. It condemned and excluded heresies and established a formal doctrine for the Trinity, which was initiated by Athanasius and the Cappadocian fathers, as the orthodox and catholic dogma.
The contribution of the Cappadocian fathers was significant for the Council of Constantinoples endorsement of the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity and the condemnation of the twin heresies of Arianism and Sabellianism. They were close friends of Athanasius and followed his theological stand on the said matters. Without Athansius work, the Cappadocians work would not have been possible and without the latter, Athanasius work would not achieve its final fruits. The work of the Cappadocian fathers involved the clarification, definition, and defense of the Trinitarian doctrine, as well as the systematizing of the faith of the church and expounding the logical clarity that was possible.
Part IV The Conflict over the Person of Christ
According to the Council of the Constantinople, the true Christian orthodoxy included the belief that Jesus Christ was and is truly God and truly man, consubstantial with both God the Father and humans. This was viewed to end all debate about the Trinity. Christians declared that God is a single divine being that eternally existed in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. However, despite the fact that the Trinity doctrine was settled there were still doctrinal issues about Christ.
There were major theological issues about the nature of the God-man, Jesus Christ, especially from the schools of Antioch and Alexandria. While all agreed that Jesus was the God Incarnate, the debate revolved around how Christians should express and explain the humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ. The problem that surrounded this mystery was like the problem of the mystery of the Trinity for the Sabellians who claimed that they believed in this doctrine, but expressed it in a different language and imagery. It was not enough anymore to declare you believed in the Trinity, instead there was a need to know how this belief could be expressed to other people.
Behind the theological debates between Antioch and Alexandria, there was a political dispute over the domination of over the church of Constantinople. Before the Christological controversy began, Christian leaders from these cities were already eyeing one another in suspicion because of their own political agenda.
One of the major difference between Alexandrian and Antiochene theologies was the differences they have experienced when it came to their biblical interpretation, hermeneutics. The Alexandrian pattern was established during the time of Christ wherein the Jewish theologian Philo stated that literal and historical reference of the Hebrew Scriptures were of least importance. Instead, he sought to discover biblical narratives allegorical or spiritual meaning. In short, Philo noted that the Hebrew Bible usually referred to something else than what it plainly stated.
On the other hand, the Antioch church was noted to have a more literal and historical hermeneutical method. Thus, they often resisted in finding spiritual meanings by claiming that a biblical story was allegorical unless there was some good reason to believe the story was intended to be figurative.
They also have differing views when it came to the doctrine of salvation. Alexandrian soteriology was inclined towards believing the Eastern deification view about the process and ultimate goal of salvation. They placed it in such a way that it was the center of their theological teachings. Their fundamental thought was that if their nature was filled with the divine life, the divine Logos must unite it to himself, thus a real unification of Godhead and manhood. It emphasized on the need to have an intimate unity of divine and human in Christ, in order for the divine transform human nature.
On the other hand, Antiochene soteriology was similar to most of the Alexandrian views such as in terms of deification and the sharing of the divine aspects through Christs salvation. However, they were concerned with the human role in salvation.
While Alexandrians would affirm that the human person needs to receive Gods healing power through the sacraments by free choice, the Antiochenes drew that all-important role of human free choice in salvation right back into the incarnation itself. The humanity of Jesus had to have free moral agency in order to achieve salvation for us.
This section also included the controversy from Nestorius and Cyril. Nestorius, as a newly appointed patriarch, placed a stop to the songs and prayers to Mary, as Theotokos or the God-bearer. This concerned the Christians in the city of Antioch and gladdened Alexandrian spies because they saw it as a chance to get back at Antioch. On the other hand, in Alexandria, there was also a patriarch of importance, Cyril.
Cyrils reputation was tainted for reasons such as sending spies to the Constantinople to lurk in the shadows and catch Nestorius or anyone in Antioch in heresy and because he was suspected of being a bridge between two heresies, Apollinarianism and monophysitism.
Nestorius preached against the Marian title of Theotokos and offered to replace it with Christotokos, which meant Christ-bearer. He found it unorthodox to say that God was born of a woman, instead it should be Christ was born of a woman. Olson noted that it was important to consider what Nestorius was saying and what he was not saying. For example, he was not denying the deity of the Son of God. He also wholeheartedly agreed with the Nicene Creed about the equal divinity and glory of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He was also not denying the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. He was only interpreting that classical Antiochene Christology about the birth of a man Jesus Christ, whom from his conception was intimately united with the eternal Logos of God. However, in the end, his theology was rejected because it emphasized on the two natures of Christ that had the danger of presenting his humanity as a distinct individuality against his divine nature.
Olson noted that the Council of Chalcedon allowed for an end for the Antioch-Alexandria controversy over the person of Christ and promoted the acceptance of the mystery behind it. However, it did not bring final closure to the discussion about the doctrine. There were still struggles from different regions, in terms favoring either Antioch or Alexandria.
Part V The Great Tradition Divides between East and West
Up to a certain point in Christian theology, Olson described the story to hold a relatively unified church that was both catholic and orthodox. Heresies and temporary schisms threatened the unity of the early church but it did not come to the point wherein the church would split. In fact, the church even used coercive power to enforce unity, even uniformity. In the fifth century, the bishop saw Christendom to be in fellowship with one another despite the fact that this fellowship was already strained and threatened to split.
However, tensions between the churches of the West that considered the bishop of Rome as the supreme patriarch of all Christendom, and the East, that considered the Constantinople patriarch as the center of Christendom, continued to widen the gap between the different churches. Later on, the East and the West official severed ties between them in 1054, as the patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople excommunicated each other after the great schism between them was never healed.
Thus, there were two branches of Christianity that laid claim to be the one true apostolic church, the orthodox and the catholic. They were later known as Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Each tradition also considered themselves to be the authentic continuation of the church of the apostles and born on the day of Pentecost. Olson noted that the divide was more evident from the refusal of Eucharistic fellowship. Members of the churches of Rome considered the bishop of Rome, as the pope and the Vicar of Christ were not allowed to partake Eucharist with the members of the Eastern family of churches.
In the midst of this division, Augustine stood at a major crossroad of theology and directed the West in a certain direction. A major feature of his theology emphasized on the absolute supremacy of God and the absolute helplessness of the human soul on the grace of God. Before Augustine, Christian theology assumed a view that God and the world had a relationship called synergism. This was known as the idea and belief that God and humans cooperate on some level in order to produce history and salvation. Before him, there was the perception that humans have a certain degree of freedom to dictate their destinies. While Augustine did not reject human freedom, the overall theme of his thought was against any genuine freedom that could impact or derail the perfect will of God.
From the Roman Catholic Churchs perspective, there was no break from something else. According to their view, the Eastern bishops were the one the broke away from the great Church and that all Protestant denominations were not the true churches of Jesus Christ. They considered them religious sects that needed to return to the mother church of Rome.
Olson noted that if the bishops of the Western church would be asked if the Eastern bishops were acknowledged as genuine Christians, they would despite what they viewed to have different beliefs and practices. The same was true for the Eastern bishops, in their perception of the Western ones. Nevertheless, the two halves of the Great Church experienced strong problems and dealt with them in different ways. One major difference between the two churches was their perception of worship, as an outgrowth of Scriptural studies. Olson described, Eastern Orthodox theology is never divorced from divine liturgy --- that is worship by the faithful people of God. In fact, leading spokespersons for the Eastern tradition argue that its theology is an outgrowth of its tradition of worship.
There were many differences in the theological aspects of the Great Schism between the Eastern and Western Christian churches. However, most differences revolved around the traditions that these two divisions followed. Olson gave an example regarding the clerical celibacy that was required for Western church priests and how Eastern Church priests were allowed to marry.
Furthermore, there was also significant controversy over the papacy. Western church Christians strongly believed that the bishop of Rome served as Peters successor. The apostle Paul was considered as the first bishop of Rome according to Western church tradition. However, Easter Christians of the ninth and tenth centuries viewed this to be the Western churches illegitimate attempts to dominate Christendom. They further accused the church to force monarchy of the pope.
Part VI Scholastics Revive Enthrone Theology
Intellectual reflection on God and salvation began to emerge with Scholastic theology, which was founded in the West in the eleventh century. Universities emerged and educated independent scholars who gathered around schools of great cathedrals and monasteries. While they never took vows or were never ordained, they were expected to live like priests and monks. Celibacy was a norm for these people, together with chastity, poverty and obedience to the church. Out of these universities, scholasticism emerged.
Medieval scholastic theologians and philosophers posited that human reason could with the help of Gods grace enabled them to answer virtually every conceivable question. It had an optimistic epistemology, which referred to the theory of human knowledge. However, critics would call this view overly idealistic and dependent on human intellect and pointed out the danger of pushing aside divine revelation. While others defended this movement and said that faith and revelation were still necessary and present factors in the equation, there was a genuine generalization that everything seemed to be accessible to human cognition and classification during that time. Christian scholastic thinkers were determined to operate within the realm of faith and divine revelation from the Bible and church tradition, as well as not solely rely on human reason.
There were three common characteristics for medieval scholasticism, which stood out to be important to Christian theology. First, there was a passionate acceptance for human reason to achieve knowledge within the realm of theology. Scholastics functioned under the principle of using faith to seeking knowledge or that they must believe in order for them to understand.
The second common characteristic of medieval scholasticism was the attention given to correcting the relationship between non-Christian worldviews and divine revelation. One of the most significant contributions of this movement in the thirteenth century was the work of the Greek philosopher Aristotle and how it was being rediscovered within the context of Christian universities in Europe. Through this, scholastic theologians attempted to show the compatibility of the philosophers arguments with the truths of Christianity.
The third common characteristic of medieval scholastic theology was the employment of teaching and writing styles in the manner of commentaries regarding past theologians and philosophers through dialectic. Olson described this as the method of posing objections to standard answers, and then setting forth the solution. Anselm of Canterbury was one of the first great scholastic theologians and produced many works through prayers and dialogues.
However, the greatest scholastic thinker of them all was Thomas Aquinas through setting forth a proposition, objections and traditional answers from accepted authorities. He was also known to have argued for only one possible logical truth. Olson noted that it was impossible to overestimate the significance of Aquinas work for the story of Christian theology. This was not to present his work to agree with every Christian theologian, orthodox or Catholic, but his approach to theology and his foundational ideas remained with modern-day theologians.
However, during the fourteenth and fifteenth century, Europe was in cultural turmoil. The church was falling into ruins in the face of rising Nationalism and the bubonic plague. The healthy working relationship between the pope and the emperor was quickly fading and the church was beginning to fall under the control of French kings. Furthermore, the renaissance was a movement against the stifling control that authorities had over culture. It invoked the mood of individualism among artists and intellectuals. Humanism described the mood of the Renaissance. It was a time wherein the Augustinian pessimism about humanity was rejected and the cultural creativity of the human person was promoted. During the time wherein the Western church was experiencing chaos due to the emergence of humanism and the lose of control over society, there were also reformers that were questioning the theology and practices, which created internal conflict on top of the external problems of the church.
Part VII The Western Church Reforms Divides
Christian theology in Europe was in trouble at the dawn of the sixteenth century. Erasmus was a Christian humanist who used the term theology, as a synonym for pointless speculation and theologian, for an ivory-tower thinker who had lost touch with reality. His theology was equated with scholasticism. It heavily looked upon science under the domination of the papal Curia, wherein the Vatican bureaucracy dictated what everyone should think about what. Erasmus protected against this and viewed the Curia to be irrelevant, as well as corrupt.
Thus, Erasmus offered his philosophy of Christ as his solution to the lethargic view he had for Christian life. He hoped it could bring about new life to the science of theology through focusing on practical matters of morality and ethical living. Most historians dated the dawn of the Reformation of the church when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the cathedral door in protest to the errors of the Western church of Christianity.
Following Luther, there were also other leading voices that were raised against the theology of the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, a third Great Schism was observed in Christendom. Olson described the first one to be the split between the East and the West in 1054. He viewed the second one to be the medieval struggle between the three popes form 1368 and 1417. Then, the third was the division between the Roman Catholic and the Protestant churches and the excommunication of Luther from the Church of Rome.
Olson called it the way Luther rediscovered the gospel and how it divided the Western Church. Luthers view of God and salvation was changed because of his newfound interpretation of the gospel of justification by grace through faith alone. He observed that there were many theology and tradition that simply included works to merit mans salvation. This crisis came hugely because of the issue of indulgences wherein Christians felt they needed to buy their salvation through such traditions and practices. While the church referred to these as works of love, it seemed that through human effort, Christians were paying for the masses of souls in purgatory and taking pilgrimages and using devotional prayers to achieve their salvation. Luther rejected this and started a revolutionary movement that divided the Western church.
While Luther was not able to publish a systematic theology and his thoughts were largely incoherent from his 95 theses, Swiss reformers presented a more organized and systematized view of new Protestant theology. In the process of doing this, Reformed theology emerged. It was a form of protestant theology that emerged from the teachings of Zwingli and John Calvin. Reformed theology shared three standard Protestant principles, which included, salvation through faith alone the special, ultimate authority of the Scripture and the priesthood of believers.
When it came to Reformed theology, there was always the emphasis on Gods sovereignty. Many theologians in this movement highlighted the sovereignty of God over nature and history.
Furthermore, the popular and scholarly identification of the Reformed faith involved monergistic providence and predestination. Thus, Reformed theologians diverged from Luther in three areas of theology, which included soteriology, ecclesiology and sacramental theology.
Olson described the Protestant Reformers to be divided into two categories, which included the Magisterial Reformation and the Radical Reformation. He described the former to included leaders like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and Thomas Cranmer. They viewed cooperation between the church and the state. They also fought to drive out Romanists and heretics. On the other hand, the Radical reformer included the Anabaptists. They emphasized on the absolute necessity to have a personal commitment to Christ in order to be saved, as well as the prerequisite of baptism. They claimed to life-changing conversions and after they had studied the New Testament, they concluded that infant baptism should be rejected because true baptism precedes true repentance and faith.
Furthermore, the reformations of the Church of England and the Church of Rome were also complicated processes wherein they experienced a time wherein they went on their separate ways. During that time, the Reformation in England was based on a theological nature. On the other hand, the reformation of the Roman Catholic Church was ecclesiastical in nature, which included changes in practices. This was characterized by the hardened traditional theology and liturgy. Olson described how these two churches went separate yet parallel ways.
Olson described the Council of Trent as the Jewel of the Catholic Reformation They noted that there were no other council in church history that was able to address so many questions and points of doctrine, as well as laws. Roman Catholics considered Trent as a great achievement, which defined dogma and unified the church against the so-called heresies of the Protestant sects. In the end, the Council of Trent was characterized by the promulgation of many doctrinal decrees and canons.
Part VIII Protestants Follow Diverse Paths
There was a time in the story of Christian theology wherein Protestant sects held on to different theologies that drove them into diverse paths. The most significant division that occurred was among the parting of the catholic and orthodox churches. However, there was another split that were experienced long after that which experienced conflict and controversy among themselves about the doctrine of predestination. Thus one of the major splits in Christendom was the split because the Dutch Reformed theologian Jacob Arminius rejected the Zwinglian and Calvinist doctrine entirely in favor of synergism and free will.
A new theological stream emerged in the form of Arminianism. It was synonymous to Protestant synergism and the rejection of the classical Augustine-Zwinglian-Calvinist belief about meticulous providence and absolute predestination. The Reformed Church of Netherlands excommunicated Arminius and his followers through the Synod of Dort (1618-1619). Arminianism was described to be virtually synonymous with Pelagianism among the Puritans and other conservative Calvinists.
Pietism, according to its leading modern interpreter, was noted to be one of the least understood movements in Christian history. It was oftentimes associated with world flight and legalist practices. Historians also viewed this movement in a negative light. It was associated with subjectivism, individualism and other-worldliness. They were often connoted to have holier than thou attitudes in comparison to people that did not have the same beliefs as they did. However, Olson noted that this perception was actually far from the historical foundation of this movement. It was based on loyalty and completion for Lutheran theology. They regarded Luther as a hero and wanted to live faithfully to the Luther reforms.
Olson also described the struggle between the Puritans and the Methodists in the revival for English theology. Nevertheless, they failed to do so and decided to split away. Although Calvinist in theology, they were viewed to inject a different flavor in their practices and perceptions. They were known to be religiously intolerant and morally strict. There were two Puritan groups that emerged, which included Presbyterianism and Congregationalism.
Olson noted that the various Protestant movements were a product of a common perception of Reformed theology, as something that was incomplete or off-track. Deism or natural religion was known to have no prophet or leaders. It was something that resulted out of simply recognizing the sovereignty of a divine being. This movement sought to improve Reformed theology as well. This movement emphasized on human reasoning in religion. It was created to fight against strife, superstition, and arbitrary authority. It sought to usher in Christianity into the modern age of peace, enlightenment and toleration. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, they became known as Liberal Protestants. Traditional Reformed theologians rejected this movement and accused it of atheism and called its leaders infidels. Nevertheless, it left an indelible mark in Christian theology as it spread in North America.
Part XI Liberal Conservatives Respond to Modernity
Olson introduced the final section of his presentation of Christian theology with the two significant theological books that were published in the first year of the 20th century, which included Reconstruction in Theology and What is Christianity These books were noted to contain a new kind of Christian theology that was reconstructed to fit the new century, called liberal Protestant theology.
Olson noted that there were two basic tenets of a new kind of modern type of theology. One of which was the need to revise the traditional Christian thought in the light of modern culture, philosophy and science. The second tenet was about the need to discover Christianitys true essence beneath the layers of traditional dogma that turned irrelevant or to provide possibility to believe in the light of modern thought.
Olson described liberalism to be similar to the understood natures of Pietism, Puritanism, and Deism. He recognized the misconception about liberal theology, as a denial, instead of viewing it as an approach that was distinct or positive to theological methodology. Instead of simply focusing on the doctrines they were supposedly denying, Olson projected that there was a need to question why these theologians questioned these traditional beliefs. According to this view, there was a need for Christian theology to become modern or die out as public religion with universal appeal and influence. According to the liberalist theologian, if Christians did not adjust their views according to the times, it would turn into superstition and into esoteric spiritualism.
The experience of the full impact of liberal Protestant theology gave rise to the stern reaction from theologians that were hardcore supporters of Protestant orthodoxy. Abraham Kuyper, a Reformed theologian and statesman, was one of the defenders of orthodox doctrines. He pointed out how Christianity was in danger of modernism and humanism. He was not alone in these sentiments, as they were others that threatened to destroy the authentic nature of Christianity and destroy the heritage of this religion. In response to Protestant theology, fundamentalism arose, as a reaction against liberal theology and modern thought. It sought to preserve classical Protestant theology and to defeat liberal accommodation to modern thought.
Furthermore, Neo-orthodox also emerged to transcend the divide in Reformed theology. The movers and shapers of neo-orthodoxy were described to have experienced disillusionment with both traditional Protestant orthodox, as well as liberal Protestant theology. It also strongly disagreed with fundamentalism when it came to the Bible. The theologians in this category wanted to recover the great Protestant doctrines for human depravity, grace above nature, salvation by faith alone and the transcendence and sovereignty of God. They viewed God to be knowable only through the Scripture, apart from this man could now know about God. They viewed Gods word as his speech to humanity through the history of Jesus Christ. They also rejected the liberalism view of natural theology and rational or experiential approach to the knowledge of God.
Olson described that there still existed, similar to the situation over the years for the story of Christian theology, a struggle to overcome the diversity among the different theological movement and perspectives for what was the genuine Christian truth. Olson searched for the thread that tied the diverse theological conceptions into one story line.
One great dream for twentieth century Christianity that captivated the minds and hearts of many liberal theologians on its threshold was ecumenical unity. They believed, in typically optimistic fashion, that twentieth century would become the Christian century through a gradually emerging consensus of Christians worldwide.
Conclusion
Olson illustrated a rich story of Christian theology that was filled with enough elements of a narrative that would capture the interest and emotions of its readers. The story of Christian theology was indeed characterized by diversity, tension, and the search for unity of belief. There were numerous cults and pagan philosophers that attached the nature of God and the Holy Scripture that gave rise to repeated times of tension and persecution for the Christian community.
As if external tension was not enough, there were also significant conflicts from within the Christian Church, which resulted in different accounts of divide. Numerous Christian thinkers stepped up in order to confront the conflicts that separated the different sects in the Christendom. These thinkers, in one way or another, provided significant contributions in enriching the study about God, over the centuries that had passed. Nevertheless, Olson declared that however complex and conflicted the story of Christian theology could be, he professed that every Christian should be proud to claim that this is the story behind their faith because it was a story of Gods work in the world. Furthermore, it was a story of the conception of the firm foundation of basic Christian beliefs and practices.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment