medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Good day, eh?
Sharon, you asked:
> Frank, to take this a bit further, was the question posed
> by Occam then taken up by anyone else? In other words,
> was the validity of transubstantiation challenged before
> the Reformation?
Ahhhhhh. Here we enter vexed territory where
I am far from the best guide of those on this
list.
The short, quick, and dirty answer is: Yes.
That said, there was a long and tedious process in
arriving at the doctrine of transubstantiation in its
final form. As with most doctrinal formulations
the process began with a well-publicised attack upon
the status quo, the status quo -- according to my
inexpert reading -- being a general acceptance
of an ill-defined transubstantiation. The attacker
was Berenger of Tours in the eleventh century
who argued that the bread and wine "signify"
(significant) the body and blood of Christ. He
used words like signum, figura, and similitudo
to describe what the Sacrament is. This sort of
teaching rapidly brought strong rebutal from many
quarters. It is in this opposition to Berenger's
view that, according to my understanding,
transubstantiation took on a much sharper,
clearer deliniation and definition. I would add
that it has often -- if, indeed, not usually --
been the case that a dogma has been carefully
defined only after it has been attacked.
Occam raised the question of a real sacramental
presence without transubstantiation, but rejected
it because the Church taught otherwise. This,
of course, was much later. Pierre d'Ailly, the
Cardinal of Cambrai, and an interpreter of Occam,
repeated Occam's argument, virtually verbatum,
in his commentary on Peter Lombard's SENTENCES.
He, too, rejected it as had Occam.
The next person of whom I am aware to take up
Occam's question is Luther. See his "The Babylonian
Captivity of the Church" [Luther's Works, American
Edition, 36:28f; WA 6, 497-573]. What I find interesting
is that while Luther thinks he is lifting a section from
d'Ailly, he is actually very closely following Occam.
This is a VERY sketchy and incomplete summary.
I trust those more expert than I will correct it and
provide a sharper focus. I hope so, because the
question you raise -- the development of the
dogma concerning the Sacrament -- is worthy
of a better treatment than this.
Regards,
Frank
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|