https://journals.openedition.org/lisa/125
In his reference to Scotus at Regensburg, the Pope seemed to criticise his teachings. Benedict’s remark on Scotus appeared just as controversial as the quotation from the Byzantine Emperor. The only contrast was that the quotation from an almost unknown Emperor caused a storm of indignation, whereas his observation on an almost unknown medieval theologian and philosopher was hardly noticed. On the authority of the French Islamist Arnaldez, Benedict first argued that the eleventh-century Andalusian Muslim philosopher Ibn Hazm “went so far as to state that God is not bound even by His own word, and that nothing would oblige Him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practise idolatry”. The Pope added in a later note to his lecture that “the fact that comparable positions exist in the theology of the late Middle Ages will appear later in my discourse”. And these comparable positions were indeed mentioned, with Scotus taking pride of place! Benedict appeared to criticise Scotus for his voluntarism. He stated that
[…] in all honesty, one must observe that in the late Middle Ages we find trends in theology which would sunder this synthesis between the Greek spirit and the Christian spirit. In contrast with the so-called intellectualism of Augustine and Thomas, there arose with Duns Scotus a voluntarism which, in its later developments, led to the claim that we can only know God’s voluntas ordinata. Beyond this is the realm of God’s freedom, in virtue of which He could have done the opposite of everything He has actually done. This gives rise to positions which clearly approach those of Ibn Hazm and might even lead to the image of a capricious God, who is not even bound to truth and goodness. [...] God does not become more divine when we push Him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed Himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf.
Mentioning Duns Scotus in this context was perhaps just as unfortunate as suggesting that the Prophet Mohammed could be linked with violence.
Comments