|
| |
Reading
Questions: Early Christian Philosophers
The
Early Church Fathers
Here
we are interested in understanding the basic intellectual framework constructed
by thinkers early on in the development of Christianity as a religious movement.
All of these people were writing before Christianity was accepted as a
legitimate religion, let alone exalted to the status of the official religion of
the Roman Empire. Further, you must remember that all of these thinkers were
working and writing in the eastern Empire –and hence, were dealing not only
with the Roman cultural imperatives that existed there, but were also responding
to and working with very well entrenched Hellenistic and Persian cultural and
intellectual patterns of thought and behavior. Finally, because of the fluidity
of movement that both the Roman and Persian (Parthian) Empires afforded, there
where many other influences with which these thinkers had to contend (notably
from India and Central Asia). So, this is a very volatile mixture.
Another
point to note: most of these writers had two basic concerns (not always well
distinguished, and often mixed up with other subsidiary concerns). First, they
were interested in defending their faith from attacks from other –often more
well established—outside influences. Second, they were interested in simply
defining what exactly their faith was and what it entailed. In other words, they
were still discovering and determining exactly what it meant to be a
Christian and they were trying to work this out both for themselves and for
others. This was the beginning of the time of the great heresies –before the
various synods established a canonical set of texts and doctrines that defined
Christianity.
The
Gospels.
**It
is important to keep in mind that we are not reading these texts specifically as
sacred texts –rather, what we want to do is examine these texts for their philosophical
and cultural import. This will be hard for those of us who were raised to
consider these texts as sacred, but it is important to adopt an attitude towards
them similar to the attitude we would adopt towards any other philosophical or
cultural text.
- While
reading Paul, in particular, try to identify specific passages where you
believe you see significant philosophical content. For example, are there
places where the conceptual apparatus developed by Greek philosophers (in
particular) are being used?
- Consider
carefully the passages from Romans (1:16-32; 3:21-31; 5:1-11;
7:14-8:39 and 12-13). What do we see here in terms of the concept of faith
and the role that faith should play in our lives? What is the relationship
between the body and soul described here? Relate this to Plato/Aristotle.
- Still
with Romans: ask yourself this question: for Plato and Aristotle
there is an important sense in which our “salvation” (or our ability to
live a good or happy life) is clearly within our power as human beings (not
easy, but surely is possible). Is this true for Paul? Can we live good lives
by ourselves (i.e. without help from God –with divine grace or
spirit)? What are the implications of this for our lives? Also, consider,
for both Plato and Aristotle the goal of human life is happiness (eudiamonia)
–is this true of the ethic of Christianity as we see it described here?
- Consider
Acts 17:16-43 and Colossians 2:8-10. How does Paul seem to
describe the relation between philosophy and faith, or philosophy and
religion?
(Possible
Journal Question) What is faith? How would you define it? What role should
it, or does it, play in our lives? How is faith related to reason? Are they
compatible, contradictories or merely contraries? Can there be a rational faith
or a faithful rationality? Is faith a kind of knowledge or is it an attitude or
something else entirely? Does faith rely on God or can you experience faith
without God’s intervention?
(Another
Possible Journal Question) How should philosophy relate to religion
generally? Are they enemies or can they be made compatible? Do you find Clement,
Tertullian, Origen more amenable to your understanding of this relation, or none
of the above? What is at stake in this question (today)?
The Church Fathers
**These
should be a bit easier since these documents do not have the status of sacred
texts. Again, however, read them as you would read any text –look for the
arguments they make or imply and look for the kinds of attitudes and beliefs
that they assert or potentially reflect from the cultural context in which they
were written.
- What
is the proper relationship between philosophy and faith? Both Clement and
Tertullian address this issue. Why does Tertullian feel that philosophy is
dangerous? What kind of arguments (such as they are) does he make? Is
Tertullian right? Is Clement? Is there another position or attitude that can
be taken?
- While
you are reading Origen and Philo keep in mind the following questions:
- What
do you see emerging here in terms of the basic areas of concern or the
basic questions that arise when one tries to think philosophically
(rationally??) about biblical stories such as the story of creation?
- What
basic definition of God arises or is articulated in this passage?
- What
are the positions or questions that Origen and/or Philo feels he must
argue against, and how does he construct those arguments?
- What
use of philosophy (philosophical argumentation, conceptual structure,
whatever) do you see Origen and Philo making?
**We
have skipped Plotinus, but I recommend you read him –particularly concerning
his doctrine of emanation.
- Pseudo
Dionysius Areopagite constitutes a later figure than one people we have been
looking at previously (about four centuries give or take). What is
interesting about Dionysius is that he marks (not the beginning, but a major
stream of) a mystical tradition within both Christianity and Christian
philosophy during this period. So, in reading Dionysius keep in mind the
following questions:
- Do
you see (and how do you see) Platonic and Neo-Platonic influences in his
writings? Consider both the language that he uses, the questions that he
is addressing, and the type of “argumentation” that he produces.
- What
are the basic problems that he addresses? Try to lay out what these
problems are and why they are problems.
- How
does he define “evil”? What is the importance of his discussion of
this discussion considered both generally, and specifically in terms of
the Christian (religious and philosophical) tradition?
- How
can we know God? What is the importance of his answer to this
question?
- Why
might Dionysius be considered “mystical” –is this a correct way of
approaching his work?
St.
Augustine.
The
importance of Augustine for the development of the intellectual culture of
western Europe cannot be underestimated. He was working and writing during a
highly tumultuous period of Roman and Christian history (who wasn’t?) and his
work became central in the Christian self-understanding that developed in
western Europe in the post-Roman world.
On the Free Choice of the Will
- What
is the question that Augustine and Evodius are discussing? Why is this
question important? (Remember the basic Christian presuppositions
functioning here).
- What
is the answer to the question: why did God give humanity free will?
(preliminary answer: first section.)
- What
is the problem of evil and the free will?
- How
does Augustine propose to show that God exists? (This is a long and
relatively complicated argument, so go through it carefully).
- What
is the relation between the senses, the inner sense and reason? How do
humans differ from animals?
- How
does Augustine relate these parts in terms of “superiority”? Why does he
relate them in this way? What is the general rule by which we can tell when
one function is superior than another?
- How
can we prove that reason is the most excellent faculty in humanity? Why is
this important as part of the proof of God’s existence?
- How
do we distinguish between objects that are “personal” and objects that
are “common?”
- How
does “number” come into this exposition?
- What
is the role of wisdom and truth here
City
of God Book
XII
- What
is at issue in this book? That is what is Augustine after here –what is he
trying to define or articulate?
- Try
to outline the basic arguments he makes –the major points he makes and the
arguments he gives for them. Then, try to articulate the relations between
these major points.
- How
does Augustine define the nature of evil? What is significant about this
definition? What does it mean that for Augustine everything that is created
is by virtue of that creation good? Why is it so important that
Augustine makes this point and makes it forcefully? What is at stake here?
- What
is significant about Augustine’s claim that there is no efficient cause of
the “evil will”?
- What
do you think about all of this?
Boethius
Another
important, but unfortunately often overlooked, figure in the early medieval
period. If not for Boethius, the little bit of Greek philosophy that existed in
the western European world during the early middle ages would have been much
less, if not non-existent. For this, if for nothing else, Boethius deserves our
regard –but then, there is also the Consolation of Philosophy.
- When
reading this text, again, consider how you would articulate the basic
question(s) at issue or under review here. What is the problem? How does
Boethius argue here –how strong are his arguments?
- What
is the problem of “free will”? How does Boethius broach this problem
with Philosophy? What makes it an important question in this context?
- Why,
to understand this question and the proper answer to it, must we turn our
attention to the divine intellect? What is the nature of this divine
intellect?
- What
is the distinction between simple and conditional necessity? How does this
distinction help solve the problem of free will?
(Possible
Journal Questions)
- Do
you think that there is a conceptual problem in trying to hold that both God
is good and all knowing and all-powerful and that there is evil in the
world? Try to lay out what you think this problem is (whether or not you
think it is solvable or particularly significant) and then what you think of
Augustine’s or Boethius’ responses to this problem. Is there another way
of solving this?
- Do
we have free will? What exactly is this? What are the ramifications of
saying we do or do not have such freedom? Can free will be made compatible
with God (as His nature is understood traditionally)? What do you think of
this? What are the ramifications of this question and the various answers
possible for our living?
- Consider
the way in which philosophy (philosophical argumentation, concepts, etc)
appear in both Augustine and Boethius. Are there significant differences or
similarities? Do you think its role is proper? Would you agree that
we can find consolation in philosophy?
|