90
edits
Changes
no edit summary
===Philosophical Implications===
[[File:SummaTheologiae.jpg|left|270px|thumbnail|<i>Summa Theologia</i>]]Moreover, this individualistic turn also seeped over into the relationship between theology and philosophy. To understand how, first we must briefly explain the dominant mode of theological discourse in the Middle Ages: scholasticism. Scholasticism was a mode of thinking about theological questions that was introduced through the dialectical method of philosophy. In other words, in order to understand theological questions a scholastic would apply the use of logic to weigh varying traditional solutions. So, theological deliberation was always done in conversation with tradition, but also through the use of logic. Thus, the reason this method is called “dialectical” is because it presupposes that discovery of truth happens in dialogue. It is a social discernment and discussion with the past, positing that new theological depth can only be extrapolated from the existing tradition, building upon what has already been discussed and discovered. Thus, in scholastic theological thought three authorities reigned: scripture, tradition, and logic. Any theologian or individual must consult tradition, logic, and the scriptures when attempting to add to theological discourse.
Luther rejected and challenged scholastic methodology in positing that application of logic to theological questions was corrosive and destructive. When looking for theological truth one ought to consult Scripture—both logic and the tradition were not apt resources. Luther indicated his disdain for scholastic philosophy in an explicit treatise entitled, “Disputation Against Scholastic Philosophy,”<ref> Theodor Dieter, <i>Der junge Luther und Aristoteles: Historisch-systematische Untersuchungen zum Verhältnis von Theologie und Philosophie</i> (Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 2001), 28–37. </ref> in which he hammered the scholastics for their integration of Aristotelian logic in theological thought and condemned the methodology more generally. Now, this separated the theologian from the preceding tradition in a way that was unprecedented. One could simply go to scripture to uncover theological truths; they need not consult with the traditional theological wisdom or apply logic,necessarily, to find the best or most reasonable conclusions. Truth, for Luther, was only revealed through the medium of divine revelation; philosophy wasn’t any help.
