The Pillar & Ground of Truth
Nominalism, Voluntarism, & Thomism continued...

If you have not read the article entitled Catholic Protestantism, you should check it out before reading this article.

The purpose of this article (Pillar & Ground of Truth) is to emphasize that Thomistic doctrines were not suppressed by the doctrine of the Reformation.

When I speak of Thomistic doctrine, I do not point to clearly established Catholic doctrine or dogma, but rather, the idea laid down by Thomas Aquinas which attempts to comprehend Christian doctrine through a realistic & comprehensive intellectual sense. Aquinas incorporated much of Aristotle's logic into his efforts to either elucidate or simplify his Theology.

This same concept, I argue, is seen in the writings and practices of the Reformers, although we may be tempted to misinterpret their stance, since they were fighting the sensless doctrines of their time, and attempting to elevate the importance of Faith (Sola Fide).

It has been argued by some that, among the various doctrinal implications of the Reformation was the influence of Voluntarism, however I think that those who truly hold to the key doctrines of the Reformation (i.e., those who call themselves Reformed) would disagree.

For instance, Matthew Henry, when commenting on God's love for the "Gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob," says that His love was, in particular, for His "Houses of Doctrine." (Not the Voluntaristic style of Modern Evangelicals, who purport God's supposed love for all men.) Here, the distinctives of discernable doctrine are elevated and respected.

Charles Spurgeon, a definite proponent of Reformed Theology, when speaking on the same passage (Psalm 87:2) speaks of the doctrine of the Church, and how she is the Ground & Pillar of Truth. He argues that the authority of this position hinges on particular doctrines, not some voluntaristic "feeling" with no legitimate foundation.

Clearly, these are not men who would seek to root out the theological or intellectual implications of the doctrine of the Church.
It was certainly said of John Gill that there was no "greater learned man in all of England" while he lived. In "A Tercentennial Appreciation" of John Gill (Edited by Michael A.G. Haykin) it is said of Gill that he was the "doyen of High Calvinism in the transatlantic Baptist community of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries."

As we look at some of the highlights of Gill's theological career, we quickly realize the extent of his Intellectual prowess and the theological nuances which composed his person. For instance, if we were to peruse his extensive published works, we would immediately be made aware of his trinitarian theology, soteriological views, Baptist ecclesiology, and his use of Scripture.

Time would fail me to speak of the Puritan views of doctrine and intellectual illumination, while clearly following established Reformation Theology.

Certainly, then, it is illogical to claim that the Reformed Tradition engenders or encourages Voluntarism, but seems, indeed, to do quite the opposite.

For a defense of Gill's scholasticism, I suggest clicking this ARTICLE.

Catholic Protestantism
Fundamentalists Linked to Reformers?

I read an article on Nominalism & Voluntarism recently. The article argued in favour of what it called "Catholic Protestantism."
Sound like an oxymoron? It did to me too, although the author attempted to make it sound plausible. This is basically what was argued (I won't say who did the arguing):
'The original postulates of the Reformation have severed the link of Faith & Reason where man & God are concerned. This is why Evangelicals today deny any Intellectual Discernment & push only the will, only Spirit-leading, or some other spiritualized intution rather than the capacity to rationally discern.'

I am revolted. Let me rant for a moment and then I'll calm down and stop breaking things.

Here is the problem with this thought: they are attempting to link the Reformation to the universal concept (intentio secunda).
However, the Universal Concept has as its object internal representations...which means that the role of the universals is to serve, merely as a label; i.e., to hold the place in the mind of a multitude of things to which it can be attributed.

So, while - resultantly - I agree that Evangelicals (what I might call hyper-fundamentalists) probably ignorantly derive their contempt of Biblical Scholarship or Intellectual Discernment from some deviation of the Reformation (the urge that each individual know God personally), I would also say that Occam's Conceptualism applied here becomes very subjective.

Why? Because, when the abstract concepts reach the individual thing itself (as it exists in nature) the Universal no longer applies.
Ergo; voluntarism MAY be a RESULT of the Protestant Reformation, but the fundamental postulates could not have been what they may have inadvertently produced.

So, while I agree that Nominalism and Voluntarism are not the same thing (as the author tries to prove), and that Thomism was encouraged directly by several Reformers, as well as indirectly by others (Martin Luther once said: "Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason..."). I think that the ultimate conclusion falls short of the truth. The principles guiding the Reformation did not themselves (on the whole) encourage Voluntarism.

John Calvin, for instance, has been accused of total denial of philosophy. While it is true, that this reputation is rather well-earned, in another way, Calvin's consideration, knowledge, and use of philosophy in his own work refutes an obscurantist representation left by a surface-level reading.
A closer reading of Calvin's magnum opus, the Institutes of the Christian Religion, along with his commentaries and treatises demonstrates that instead of denying the importance of philosophy, Calvin generally seeks to set philosophy in what he regards as its proper place.

In this sense, there is no need to "re-visit" Catholic Protestantism (or visit it in the first place), since the Reformers weren't attempting to pull away from Thomism. They had strong affinity with Aquinas, and in many respects, with Aristotle himself. However, I wholeheartedly agree that Fundamentalist Evangelicals need to re-evaluate their approach to Biblical Scholarship/intellectual discernment.

Galileo once said something to the effect of: 'I do not believe that the Creator who endowed us with the faculties of reason and intellect intended us to forgo their use.'