“For philosophy is the offspring of right reason:
and this light of reason is infused into the human mind by God Himself,
according to that remark of Tertullian,
‘Reason is of God.'”
John Davenant
on Col. 2:8, p. 290
.
.
Subsections
Use of Reason
History of
Metaphysics
Epistemology
Muslim
Cartesianism
Reformed vs. Aquinas
.
.
Order of Contents
Articles 10+
Books 8+
Quote 1
Dictionary & Encyclopedias 14+
Which Philosophy Should be Used? 5
Relation of Theology & Philosophy 6
Biblio 1
.
Articles
1500’s
Bullinger, Henry – 5th Decade, Tenth Sermon, ‘Of Certain Institutions of the Church of God, of Schools…’, pp. 479-85 in The Decades of Henry Bullinger ed. Thomas Harding, trans. H. I. 4 vols. (Cambridge: 1849-52), vol. 4
.
1600’s
Askew, Egeon – ‘An Apology, of the Use of Fathers, and Secular Learning in Sermons’ in Brotherly Reconcilement: Preached in Oxford for the Union of some, and now published with larger meditations for the unity of all in this Church and Commonwealth (London: 1605), pp. 257-353
Askew was a reformed Anglican.
Davenant, John – on Col. 2:8 in An Exposition of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians, vol. 1 (London, 1831), pp. 387-407
van Mastricht, Peter – chs. 1 & 5 of Vindications of the Truth & Authority of Sacred Scripture in Philosophical Matters Against the Dissertations of Dr. Christopher Wittich (Utrecht, 1655) in ch. 4, pp. 67-77 & 84-104 of J.A. Schlebusch, Cartesianism & Reformed Scholastic Theology: A Comparative Study of the Controversy a Master’s thesis (Univ. of the Free State, South Africa, 2013)
Ch. 1 discusses the unity and differences between philosophy and theology, a Christian philosophy, and legitimate and illegitimate principles of accommodation in the language of Scripture.
In ch. 5, van Mastricht examines and vindicates 15 Scriptures that Wittich brought to claim that Scripture uses approving language of people’s false beliefs in, not just natural, but practical, moral and spiritual things.
Baxter, Richard
The Judgment of Non-conformists, of the Interest of Reason, in Matters of Religion… (London, 1676) 21 pp.
A Christian Directory: Or, A Sum of Practical Theology, and Cases of Conscience (London: 1673), Part 3, Question 158, 159, 160, 173
.
Contemporary
Articles of Richard Muller
De Boer, Cecil – ‘Cecil De Boer on Van Tillianism and Idealist Pantheism’ from De Boer, ‘The New Apologetic’, The Calvin Forum, 19, nos. 1-2 (August-September 1953), pp 2-3. Van Til Responded to De Boer in The Defense of the Faith, 4th ed., pp. 284-287.
Duby, Steven J. – ‘In Defense of Christian Philosophy: A Response to Peter Leithart’ (2018) 22 paragraphs
“…it’s possible to articulate Christian doctrine without formally invoking concepts like “essence,” “substance” and so on. Instead of saying, for example, that in the incarnation there is one hypostasis subsisting in two distinct natures, one can say that there is just Jesus and not someone else and that Jesus always remains both truly God and truly human.
However, the fact that the use of the metaphysical language is not absolutely necessary does not mean that the metaphysical resources in question are detached from reality. It does not mean that what they offer us is just a set of coherent rules for saying things – rules that we might either take or leave. On the contrary, the classical metaphysical tradition developed by Christian thinkers like John of Damascus, Thomas Aquinas or the early Reformed theologians and philosophers involves a knowledge of how things are. Indeed, it is fundamentally an exposition of things human beings know to be true prior to engaging in any formal academic work. For example, things do have natures by virtue of which they are similar to other things. There really are substances in which accidents inhere… As we seek ways to express what God is like according to scriptural teaching, we should look to this philosophical tradition, not Kant or Hegel, because it sheds light on reality.”
Haines, David
‘On the Use of Philosophy in Theology’
Abstract: “The claim that I would like to consider in this article is that it is wrong to mix philosophy and theology, or the stronger claim, that a Christian should have nothing to do with philosophy. I propose that the problem springs, primarily, from a faulty understanding of the relationship between faith and reason. In this article we will be attempting to answer the question what place is there, in Christian theology and practice, for Philosophy? We will note, first of all, the relationship between faith and reason, theology and philosophy. Secondly we will consider the ways in which it is permissible to use philosophy in theology, and finally, we will look at some errors that are frequently made when we use philosophy in theology.”
‘The Metaphysics of Scripture’ a chapter in ed. Joseph Minich, Philosophy & the Christian (2018)
Haines has been a professor of philosophy at Veritas Evangelical Seminary.
Abstract: “…not only can philosophy help make sense of our common experience, but the Bible appears to assume a number of important philosophical concepts which, best explained by early Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato, are assumed by most people. This will be shown through a consideration of how the Bible takes for granted an approach to the world which is best described via a number of key Aristotelian concepts, such as, the four causes, act and potency, and the principle of causality… We will conclude with some considerations about the importance of moderate realism for biblical and theological studies.”
‘The Use of Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle in Reformed Theology’
Introduction: “We will do this by showing that far from being contrary to the spirit of the Protestant Reformation, the use of the writings and teachings of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, and, indeed, dependence upon these two great thinkers, can be both beneficial and useful for the development and defense of evangelical Protestant theology.
The first step, which we propose to take in this blog post, is to show that the very theologians who began the Protestant Reformation, and who provided it with its enduring form, not only used Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, but, in fact, that their theology was, on many points, dependent on Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. To do this we will begin by articulating the main premises that an argument of this nature requires. We will then consider, briefly, those facts of history which may support the premises of such an argument. This will be done by pointing out some of the most recent research concerning the relationship between Aquinas, Aristotle, and the early reformers. We will also note the continued Reformed dependency upon Aquinas and Aristotle.”
.
Books
1500’s
Melanchthon, Philip – Melanchthon: Orations on Philosophy & Education trans. Christine F. Salazar Pre (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1999) ToC
Daneau, Lambert – The Wonderful Workmanship of the World, wherien is Contained an Excellent Discourse of Christian Natural Philosophy, Concerning the Form, Knowledge & Use of All Thinges Created: Specially Gathered out of the Fountains of Holy Scripture (London, 1578)
.
1600’s
Baron, Robert – Philosophy, the Handmaiden of Theology: a Pious & Sober Explanation of Philosophical Questions that Frequently occur in Theological Disputations 2nd ed. trans. AI (1621; Robinson & Davis, 1658) 140 pp. Latin
Baron (c.1596-1639) was a Scottish minister, theologian and one of the Aberdeen doctors.
ToC
To the Reader 6
Eulogies 8
Preface 12
ToC 14
1st Exercise, Being & Essence
1. Only God is a necessary Being 18
2. Only God is Being by essence 18
3. How God is pure act is explained 20
4. Modes of existing 22
5. Explanation of: “being,” “essence,” “existence,”
“subsistence,” “suppositum” and “person” 25
6. Whether in creatures the suppositum and its singular nature
differ in reality [Yes] 28
7. Why composition from essence and existence, and from essence and subsistence, are attributed to created substances, but not to God 30
8. Whether, this being posited, that all perfection is of the essence of God [which it is], it follows that personal subsistence is of his essence? [basically No, but it is distinguished] and whether God, insofar as he is communicable to the three persons of the Trinity, is a person, as Cajetan states [not properly, but may be called such improperly; but this is not advisable] 33
9. Whether God, as He is common to the three persons, is a
singular substance [Yes & No]: and whether the three persons of the Trinity are three singular substances [No] 35
10. Whether Christ, insofar as He is a man, is a person [No]: likewise whether Christ, insofar as He is a man, is everywhere [No] 36
11. Whether Ubiquitarians’ arguments drawn from the personal union are valid [No] 38
12. Whether the Word’s personal subsistence is communicated to his human nature [not intensively or denominatively, but only sustentatively]: And whether they speak correctly who say that Christ’s humanity subsists everywhere through the subsistence of the Word? [No] and exists everywhere according to his personal being? [No; Baron affirms Christ has two existences in point 7] 41
2nd Exercise, Soul’s Origin & Propagation of Sin 45
1. Diversity of material and immaterial forms 45
2. Twofold causality and potency of matter, also on the eduction of forms from matter’s potency 46
3. Whether the rational soul is by traducianism [No] 49
4. Whether [Yes] and how man is said to truly beget man [following Scotus and Coimbra] 51
5. Whether generation is posited in the production of the form [No], or in the conjunction of the form with matter [Yes] 53
6. Whether the preceding doctrine removes the propagation of original sin [No] 56
7. Arguments which are usually brought against the preceding doctrine on native corruption’s propagation through the parents’ seed are solved 58
8. Some questions on the propagation of original sin are
proposed and solved 61
9. The final arguments which are usually brought against the creation and infusion of the soul are dissolved 62
10. Whether a more convenient or more expeditious reason could be given for the transmission of concupiscence, or the propensity to evil, than the one we have said is the third part of original sin [No] 64
11. Two other opinions on the transmission of sin are considered 66
12. It is shown that those who attack the creation of souls disagree much among themselves; and the first three of their opinions on the soul’s origin are confuted 70
13. Fourth opinion, of [the Lutheran] Balthasar Meisner, is refuted 70
14. Fifth opinion, of Timothy Bright, is confuted 74
15. All opinions on traducianism have been confuted; They cannot explain sin’s propagation more safely or easily than we 77
3rd Exercise, Faith, Knowledge & Opinion 80
1. Firmness, certainty and evidence of the assents of our mind 79
2. How knowing, believing and opining differ 81
3. Whether faith is always of things not seen [No] 82
4. Whether faith can exist at the same time as knowledge
concerning the same proposition, in the same intellect [Yes] 85
5. Division of faith into explicit and implicit; whether the non-evidence we attribute to faith supports the blind and implicit faith of the Papists [No] 87
6. On the threefold light of nature, of faith or grace, of glory 89
7. Whether there is in pilgrims a light clearer than the light of faith [as Durandus teaches; No] 91
8. Three questions are solved [1. Whether faith is well distinguished into infused and acquired? No 2. Whether faith is more certain than the sciences themselves? Yes & No 3. What it is properly to believe in God?] 93
9. Grevinchovius’s opinion that the habit of faith is not infused, but acquired, is refuted 95
10. Whether actual or habitual faith is, or can be, in infants [Not ordinarily] 97
11. Is there faith in demons? [a historical faith, Yes] 101
12. Was there faith in Christ’s soul? [No, as He was a comprehnsor even in this life] Is it in saints in heaven who have facial knowledge of God, as the Scholastics say? [No primarily; Yes secondarily] 103
13. Do the Remonstrants rightly deny that Adam, before the Fall, had the power of believing in Christ? [No] 105
14. Whether faith’s object can be false [No] 108
15. How that argument of the Remonstrants is to be solved: What each and every person is bound to believe, that is true, etc. 110
16. Whether faith is a discursive assent? [Yes] And whether the Papists use a circular discourse in establishing faith [Yes] 113
17. Whether knowledge is an act elicited from the habit of faith [Yes, contra Bellarmine] 117
18. Whether trust is an act of faith [Yes] 119
19. Whether trust is an act of the intellect [Yes], and how it differs from assent 122
20. Whether the object of salvific faith is the remission of sins already obtained? [No] Or whether it is the remission of sins to be obtained? [Yes] Where, by the way, the principal argument of Bellarmine against the object and nature of justifying faith is solved 124
21. In what way faith pertains to the will 126
22. Whether charity is the form of faith [No] 128
23. Whether religion is a theological virtue distinct from faith [No; on the Regulative Principle of Worship] 129
24. The theology of wayfarers is to be taken in three ways; theology in the first way is not a habit really distinct from faith 131
25. Contra Antonius Ruvius, theology in the second way is not a science, but divine faith 134
26. Theology in the third way, i.e. scholastic theology, is a habit aggregated from faith and the philosophical disciplines 135
27. Theology is similar to all the Aristotelian habits, but especially to prudence 136
28. Whether theology is a speculative or a practical discipline [Practical] 137
29. Whether the theology of wayfarers can be called speculative from the speculation, or vision, in Heaven [No] 139
30. Whether true and proper theology can exist in an impious, or unregenerate, man [No] 140-42
Amyraut, Moses – A Treatise Concerning Religions, in Refutation of the Opinion which Accounts All Indifferent. Wherein is Also Evinced the Necessity of a Particular Revelation and the Verity & Preeminence of the Christian Religion (London: 1660)
Gale, Theopilus – The Court of the Gentiles… pt. 1 (Of Philology), 2 (Of Philosophy), 3 (Vanity of Pagan Philosophy), 4 (Predetermination) (1670-1678)
Gale (1628–1678) was a reformed, dissenting, English Independent minister.
Baxter, Richard – A Treatise of Knowledge & Love Compared… (London: 1689) ToC
.
1900’s
ed. J. Ambrosio – The Question of Christian Philosophy Today (Fordham Univ. Press, 1999)
.
2000’s
Moroney, S.K. – The Noetic Effects of Sin. A Historical and Contemporary Exploration of How Sin Affects Our Thinking (Oxford: Lexington, 2000)
Moreland, J.P. & W.L. Craig – Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity, 2003)
Feser, Edward – Aristotle’s Revenge: The Metaphysical Foundations of Physical and Biological Science Buy (2019) 515 pp.
“Actuality and potentiality, substantial form and prime matter, efficient causality and teleology are among the fundamental concepts of Aristotelian philosophy of nature. Aristotle’s Revenge argues that these concepts are not only compatible with modern science, but are implicitly presupposed by modern science.” – Blurb
.
Quote
Herman Bavinck
Reformed Dogmatics (Baker), vol. 1, p. 607
“Though Christian dogma cannot be explained in terms of Greek philosophy, it also did not come into being apart from it. There is as yet no dogma and theology, strictly speaking, in Scripture. As long as revelation itself was still in progress, it could not become the object of scientific reflection. Inspiration had to be complete before reflection could begin.
To speak of “Mosaic”, “Pauline”, or the “Bible’s” theology and dogmatics therefore, is not advisable; the word theology, for that matter, does not occur in Scripture and has only gradually acquired its present meaning.
Theology first arose in the Christian community after the naïveté of childhood lay behind it and the adult thinking mind had awakened. Gradually a need arose to think through the ideas of revelation, to link it with other knowledge and to defend it against various forms of attack. For this purpose people needed philosophy. Scientific theology was born with its help. This did not, however, happen accidentally. The church was not the victim of deception. In the formation and development of the dogmas, the church fathers made generous use of philosophy. They did that, however, in the full awareness of and with clear insight into the dangers connected with that enterprise; they were conscious of the grounds on which they did it with express recognition of the word of the apostles as the only rule of faith and conduct. For that reason also they did not utilize the whole of Greek philosophy but made a choice; they only utilized the philosophy that was most suited to help them think through and defend the truth of God. They went to work eclectically and did not take over any single philosophical system, be it either from Plato or from Aristotle, but with the aid of Greek philosophy produced a Christian philosophy of their own.
Furthermore, they only used that philosophy as a means. Just as Hagar was the servant of Sarah, as the treasures of Egypt were employed by the Israelites for the adornment of the tabernacle, as the wise men from the East placed their gifts at the feed of the child in Bethlehem, so, in the opinion of the church fathers, philosophy was the servant of theology.
From everything it is clearly evident that the use of philosophy in theology was based, not on a mistake, but on firm and clear conviction. The church fathers knew what they were doing. Mind you, this does not rule out the possibility that at some points the influence of philosophy was too strong. But in that connection we must make a distinction between the theology of the fathers and the dogmas of the church. The church was at all times alert against the misuse of philosophy; it not only rejected Gnosticism but also condemned Origenism. And up until now no one has succeeded in explaining the dogmas materially in terms of philosophy; however often this has been attempted, in the end the scriptural character of orthodoxy has been vindicated.
Initially the Reformation assumed a hostile posture toward scholasticism and philosophy. But it soon changed its mind. Because it was not, nor wanted to be, a sect, it could not do without theology. Even Luther and Melanchton, therefore, already resumed the use of philosophy and recognized its usefulness. Calvin assumed this high position from the start, saw in philosophy an “outstanding gift of God”, and was followed in this assessment by all Reformed theologians.
The question here is not whether theology should make use of a specific philosophical system. Christian theology has never taken over any philosophical system without criticism and given it the stamp of approval. Neither Plato’s nor Aristotle’s philosophy has been held to be the true one by any theologian. That theologians nevertheless preferred these two philosophical systems was due to the fact that these systems best lent themselves to the development and defense of the truth. Present also was the idea that the Greeks and Romans had been accorded a special calling and gift for the life of culture. Still to this day, in fact, our whole civilization is built upon that of Greece and Rome.”
.
Dictionaries of Philosophy
1900’s
ed. Audi, Robert – The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy Pre (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995) 910 pp.
.
2000’s
Wuellner, Bernard – A Dictionary of Scholastic Philosophy 2nd ed. (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1956) 360 pp. 1,600 entries
.
Bibliography
Awe, Susan C. – ‘Phiolosophy: General Works’ in ARBA Guide to Subject Encyclopedias & Dictionaries (Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 1997), pp. 291-92
.
Encyclopedias of Philosophy
Online
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Some articles are freely available, others only give access to the article’s summary.
Universal Encyclpedia of Philosophy (PEF)
The website is in Polish, but can be translated via a web browser. Articles are in English and other languages, which can be translated easily through ChatGPT, etc.
.
One Volume
1900’s
Biographical Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Doubleday, 1965) 290 pp.
The Encyclopedia of Eastern Philosophy & Religion: Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Zen… eds. Schuhmacher & Woerner (Boston: Shambhala, 1989) 490 pp.
The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy & Philosophers ed. Urmson & Ree (1991) 350 pp.
.
2000’s
Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Routledge, 2000) 1,070 pp.
Encyclopedia of Classical Philosophy (Routledge, 2013) 625 pp.
By ‘Classical’ is meant the philosophy and philosophers of Greek and Roman antiquity, from roughly 600 BC to AD 600.
.
Milti-Volume
1900’s
The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 1 (A-B), 2 (C-D), 3 (E-G), 4 (H-L), 5 (L-O), 6 (Psych), 7 (Psy-Spi), 8 (Spr-Z) ed. Paul Edwards (Macmillan, 1967)
Routledge Encyclopedia Of Philosophy 10 vols in 1 (Routledge, 1998) 9,160 pp.
“Depth and breadth of coverage, clarity of presentation, impressive bibliographies, excellent use of cross references, and an extensive index combine to make this an impressive reference work. The contributors have addressed both current and past scholarship on world philosophy and religion and have produced a worthy successor to Macmillan’s 1967 Encyclopedia of Philosophy.” – American Library Association
.
Bibliography
Awe, Susan C. – ‘Phiolosophy: General Works’ in ARBA Guide to Subject Encyclopedias & Dictionaries (Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 1997), pp. 291-92
.
Which Philosophy Should be Used?
Quotes
Order of
Gerson
Cheynell
Turretin
A. Hodge
Carini
.
1400’s
Jean Gerson
On the Consolation of Theology (1418), bk. 3, pros. 4, as quoted in Johann Gerhard, Common Places, vol. 1
“The theology of Christians approves the teachings of philosophy if they are true, correct, and salutary. It uses them by its own right and makes them catholic. If they are too unclear, it sheds light on them; if they are mixed with harmful errors, it separates the precious from the cheap and keeps the one and destroys the other.”
.
1600’s
Francis Cheynell
The Divine Triunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
“I subscribe to that of Clement of Alexandrinia: We ought not to swear allegiance to any sect of philosophers, whether Stoics, Epicures, Platonists, or Peripatetics, but we must select and embrace whatsoever is true and faithfully delivered concerning God by any sect; and the Truth selected out of all sects is not vain philosophy, but Natural Divinity.”
.
Francis Turretin
Institutes (P&R), vol. 1, 1st Topic, Q. 13, ‘Is there any use of Philosophy in Theology? We Affirm’, pp. 45-56
“But the errors of philosophers are not the dictates of philosophy, any more than the mistakes of artificers are to be imputed to the art itself.
‘Philosophy,’ says Clement of Alexandria, ‘is not to be called Stoic, nor Platonic, nor Epicurean, nor Aristotelian, but whatever has been properly spoken by these sects–this, gathered into one whole, is to be called philosophy’ (Stromata 1.7 [ANF 2:308; PG 8.731]).”
.
1800’s
A.A. Hodge
Outlines of Theology 2nd ed., enlarged (Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1878), ch. 3, ‘The Sources of Theology’, pp. 63-64
“15. What is philosophy, and what is its relation to theology ?
Philosophy, in its wide sense, embraces all human knowledge, acquired through the use of man’s natural faculties, and consists of that knowledge interpreted and systematized by the reason. Science is more specific, relating to some special department of knowledge thoroughly reduced to system… Philosophy is presupposed, therefore, in science as the first and most general knowledge. It inquires into the soul and the laws of thought, into intuition and ultimate truth, into substance and real being, into absolute cause, the ultimate nature of force and will, into conscience and duty. As to its relations to theology it will be observed —
1st. The first principles of a true philosophy are presupposed in all theology, natural and revealed.
2d. The Holy Scriptures, although not designed primarily to teach philosophy, yet necessarily presuppose and involve the fundamental principles of a true philosophy. Not the inferences of these principles drawn out into a system, but the principles themselves, as to substance and cause, as to conscience and right, etc.
…
4th. The devout believer, however, who is assured that the Bible is the very word of God, can never allow his philosophy, derived from human sources, to dominate his interpretation of the Bible, but will seek with a docile spirit and with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, to bring his own philosophy into perfect harmony with that which is implicitly contained in the Word. He will, by all means, seek to realize a philosophy which proves itself to be the genuine and natural handmaid of the religion which the Word reveals.”
.
2000’s
Joel Carini
“The idea that no philosophies are better than [an]other has also only become less plausible in the last ten years…
The idea that there are no gradations among secular thinkers with regard to natural theology and natural law or even the hidden things is empirically disproven by Jordan Peterson and like thinkers…
Cornelius Van Til and Karl Barth both argued that, among all the various positions of philosophers, we should not acknowledge that some are better and others worse. They are all equally the wisdom of this age to which the hidden wisdom of Christ is opposed.
Emil Brunner came back with a rebuttal, affirming the betterness of the kind of anti-materialist and moral realist philosophy of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle and their modern successors, as opposed to the naturalism of Darwin, Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche. I would say the same for Jordan Peterson with respect to the New Atheists.”
.
On the Relation between Theology & Philosophy
Articles
1500’s
Vermigli, Peter Martyr – ‘Of Philosophy, and the comparison thereof, especially moral, with Divinity’ in The Common Places… (d. 1562; London: Henrie Denham et al., 1583), pt. 2, 3. ‘Of the Law’, pp. 300-304
Ursinus, Zachary – The Difference of this True Doctrine from Philosophy in The Sum of Christian Religion: Delivered… in his Lectures upon the Catechism… tr. Henrie Parrie (d. 1583; Oxford, 1587), Of the Holy Scripture, 2. What Religion, delivered in the Scriptures, differs from other religions…
.
1600’s
Turretin, Francis – 13. ‘Is there any use of philosophy in theology? We affirm.’ in Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1, 1st Topic, pp. 44-48
.
Book
1500’s
Vermigli, Peter Martyr – Philosophical Works: on the Relation of Philosophy to Theology Buy (Davenant Press, 2018) 396 pp.
.
Quotes
1600’s
John Arrowsmith
Plans for Holy War: How the Spiritual Soldier Fights, Conquers, & Triumphs, tr. David C. Noe (Reformation Heritage, 2024), p. 100
“…I will summarize it all in a word: philosophy behaved toward theology in the schools, at least of the fathers, like an ally; in the training schools of the Scholastics, like a schoolmistress; in the hallowed chairs of Reformed universities, like a maidservant. If anyone begrudges philosophy that post, I think such a man truly has treated theology badly, philosophy worse, and the church worst of all.”
.
1700’s
Benedict Pictet
Christian Theology, p. 54
“Reason cannot and ought not to bring forth any mysteries, as it were, out of its own storehouse; for this is the prerogative of scripture only. Also, that reason is not to be heard when complaining of its incapacity to comprehend the mysteries of faith: for, being finite, it is no wonder that reason should not comprehend many things that relate to what is infinite; and to reject a mystery because it is incomprehensible to reason, is to offend against reason itself. Neither is reason to be listened to whenever, under cover of holding the mysteries of faith, it aims at setting up its own errors.
On the very same grounds we can not call philosophy any rule of faith, although we again concede that it is of no little use, provided it assume not to itself the power of dictating in articles of faith. True philosophy indeed serves very much both to convince men and to prepare their minds; and there is a wonderful harmony between sound philosophy and divinity: for truth is not contrary to truth, nor light to light; only we must not imagine that the former is the rule by which the sense of scripture must be tried and examined.”
.
Historical
Book
ed. Sadler, Gregory B. – Reason Fulfilled by Revelation: The 1930s Christian Philosophy Debates in France Pre (Catholic University of American Press, 2011) 336 pp. ToC
.
Latin Article
1600’s
Voet, Gisbert – section 13 in 49. ‘A Disputation: Some Miscellaneous Positions’ in Select Theological Disputations (Amsterdam: Jansson, 1667), pp. 752-53
.
Bibliography
Sytsma, David – ‘A Bibliography of Early Modern Reformed Theology on Reason & Philosophy (ca. 1520-1750)’ (2019) 20 pp. The first 8 pp. are Primary Sources, then follow Secondary Sources.
“The sources below 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.” – Sytsma
.
.
.
Related Pages
Muslim Philosophy & Theology in the Middle Ages
On the Reception of Aquinas in Church History
Where Reformed Orthodox Writers Agreed & Disagreed with Aquinas