ABSTRACTS

PROGRAM GROUP IN MEDIEVAL THEOLOGY

CATHOLIC THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

2003 CONVENTION

 

Convener:

Michael Gorman, The Catholic University of America

 

Moderator:

David Williams, Belmont Abbey College

 

First Presenter:

Joan Mueller, Creighton University

"Vocation as Ultimate Authority:  Clare of Assisi and Gregory IX"

suggested reading:  Clare's Letters to Agnes: Texts and Sources, The Franciscan Institute, 2001, ISBN 1-57659-176-X.   Available by calling (716) 375-2156 or emailing franinst.sbu.edu.

 

Second Presenter:

Ralph Norman, Canterbury Christ Church University College

"Abelard's Legacy: Disputation and Negative Theology"

 

Vocation as Ultimate Authority:  Clare of Assisi and Gregory IX
Joan Mueller, Ph.D., Creighton University
            In the midst of rising papal power, continual feuding between communes, and the unrest of a better-educated laity, a thirteenth-century women's movement flowered.  The movement was powered by what Clare of Assisi would call "the one thing necessary,"—the refusal to accept property with its accompanying privileges.  While others, even religious persons, were plotting for money, land, and prestige, Clare's early Monastery of Poor Ladies formulated a sophisticated theology of vocation founded upon beatitudinal poverty.

            The test of Clare's theology came to a head when Agnes of Prague, daughter of  Bohemian King, Otakar Přemysl I, constructed a monastery and hospital and refused to endow the monastery.  The Hospital of St. Francis, which Agnes had established as a charitable institution for the poor of Prague, was well endowed in order to bring stability to its ministry.  Nervous about accepting an unendowed monastery of royal and noble women under Roman authority, Pope Gregory IX attempted to force Agnes to place her monastery juridically over the hospital, making her sisters heir to the royal resources of the hospital.  Agnes's monastery was also to be free from any obligation for the paying of taxes and tithes.

            Seeing her ability to live the essence of her Franciscan vocation slipping through her fingers, Agnes of Prague wrote to Clare for direction.  Clare's response outlines her theology of vocational authority.  According to Clare, one cannot go counter to one's vocational identity in an effort to be obedient.  Clare distinguishes between respect and submission, and advises Agnes to be respectful, but not submissive to a papal order that would undermine her vocational path.  Rather, Agnes is to follow the advice of Brother Elias, who is her true superior. 

            Agnes conferred not only with Brother Elias but also with her brother, King Wenceslaus I.  The royal Přemyslid family understood and supported Agnes's Franciscan ambitions.  Wenceslaus I wrote a politically astute letter to Gregory IX, assuring him of his allegiance to Rome, and offering even greater allegiance if the requests of his sister were heeded.  Needing the support of the Kingdom of Bohemia, Gregory IX reluctantly agreed.  He gave Agnes her "privilege of poverty."

            The above case plays out the tension that arises when the vocation of an individual or religious group who loves the church encounters papal authority.  Since Gregory IX's main agenda seems to have been protecting women from the dangers of poverty—pillage, rape, hunger, malnutrition—it is also a case study documenting the tension between the theologies of those whose are called to a preferential option for the poor and those who are called to institutional benefaction. 

            The paper will do three things.  It will briefly outline the case described above.  It will study Clare of Assisi's theology of vocation as is outlined in her second letter to Agnes of Prague.  It will raise issues for discussion concerning the implications of Clare's theology of vocation for contemporary theology.

 

"Abelard's Legacy: Disputation and Negative Theology"

Ralph Norman, Canterbury Christ Church University College

In his book on Anselm, Karl Barth identified the task of theology as one of Faith Seeking Understanding. This definition has since met with such approval that it is now difficult to find many professional theologians that would disagree with it. This is intriguing, because Anselm himself never used the word “theology” in any of his writings and was born a generation before the word began to be used in Europe. It was Abelard that introduced the word to the Latin west and gave it a professional and technical meaning, and it is clear that what he means by theology is not what Karl Barth means by it. This, I argue, has caused some confusion for those who study medieval theology, and has obscured the extent of Abelard’s contribution to the discipline.

Augustine was fond of writing crede ut intelligas; but he also argued that reason was as important as authority when the question of who or what is to be believed is being considered (De vera relig. xxiv, 45). Abelard also suggests as much in the Sic et Non. This does not make Abelard the sort of rationalist that he is sometimes suggested to be; it simply means that he recognised the problem of conflicts and contractions in the received faith. On the one hand this suggested that reason should be used to assist faith to best work out what is to be believed (hence theology); on the other it meant a new openness to a mystery which is beyond understanding. This explains that sense of negative theology in Abelard’s writings that fits ill with his reputation as a rationalist. He writes in the Theologia Christiana, ‘It should suffice for human reason to know that human intelligence cannot comprehend him who so far surpasses all things and completely exceeds the powers of human discussion and comprehension.’ (PL 178, 1124B).

Theology was adopted by the schools and by the universities that grew out of them in opposition to the faithful lectio of the monasteries. Yet it was distinct from rationalism, and, through the mediation of Lombard’s Sentences , disputation became the fundamental method pursued by medieval thinkers. So much is nothing new; but little attention has been paid by scholarship to the relationship between the method of disputation and the flowering of negative theology in the west in this period. For just at the time when the Pseudo-Denys became one of the chief authorities in the west, disputation became the dominant method. This raises the question: does the “agnosticism” over authorities implied in disputation reflect that Christian “agnosticism” beloved by negative theologians? Can a case be made that the sense of uncertainty introduced by the uncovery of tensions and contradictions in the tradition reinforce negative theology in the period? Would, for instance, Aquinas have felt that there was something fitting about the fact that tradition isn’t neat and tidy but must be disputed because it is self-subverting, and that the simplest way of overcoming such disputes is to point towards the infinite unknowability of God? The very method of disputation would then become a form of mystical practice itself. Such, at least, was hinted at by Josef Pieper in his book Scholasticism (section XII), and such is the thesis that this paper intends to defend.