Also, Tom, Augustine was at pains to claim -- whether justifiably or not is another matter -- that his notion of peccatum originale was based on earlier traditions in East and West. See especially Contra Iulianum lib. 1, where he quotes Irenaeus, Cyprian, Reticius of Autun, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose, Innocent I, Gregory Nazianzen, the Synod of Diospolis, John Chrysostom (at length), Basil, and Jerome.
Perhaps it's obvious, or perhaps worth saying anyway, that the fact that the Immaculate Conception is of 19th-century definition does not mean it was not of medieval concern. It's well known that Bernard of Clairvaux opposed Eadmer's idea as an unwelcome innovation, and that nearly all the leading theologians of the late 12th and 13th centuries opposed it (Peter Lombard, Alexander of Hales, Bonaventure, Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, &c.). The Franciscans William of Ware and Duns Scotus persuaded their followers of the opposite position. In mid-15th century, Paris and other universities began to require an oath to defend the doctrine, and even Thomist Dominican opposition eventually weakened. -- Paul Chandler
--
Paul Chandler, O.Carm. | Institutum Carmelitanum
via Sforza Pallavicini, 10 | 00193 - Roma | Italy
tel: +39-06-6810.0849 | fax: +39-06-6830.7200
[log in to unmask] |
carmelitana.blogspot.com which is here, near St Peter's and Castel S. Angelo: <
http://tinyurl.com/42wgk2> (A marks the spot)
