Latest / Reformed Thinking / Medieval Theology

Transcript

Medieval Theology · Reformed Thinking

0:00
So if a ship's captain sets his compass off by just a fraction
0:04
of a degree in Rome, well, 1000 miles later he doesn't just miss
0:08
his port, he crashes into an entirely different continent.
0:11
Right, that is such a vivid way to picture it.
0:14
Welcome to this deep dive on Reformed thinking.
0:17
Today we are looking at the longest, most concerning voyage
0:21
in church history. We really are.
0:23
We are tracing the timeline from the year 590, specifically the
0:27
inauguration of Gregory the 1st as the Bishop of Rome, all the
0:30
way to 1517. Right 1517, the moment Martin
0:33
Luther sparked the Protestant Reformation.
0:35
Yes, and we are relying strictly on the historical details laid
0:39
out in the Moody Handbook of Theology, revised and expanded
0:42
by Paul Ends. So the mission for our session
0:45
today is to analyze how the doctrines of the medieval church
0:48
drifted so severely during this era.
0:50
An era that is, you know, often labeled the Dark Ages due to
0:53
rampant institutional corruption.
0:55
Yeah. We really need to understand the
0:57
structural backdrop that made the Reformation an absolute
1:00
necessity. To map that drift accurately, we
1:03
have to establish the theological starting point.
1:05
Then we can measure the angle of deviation.
1:08
Right. So Gregory the First was an
1:09
intense student of Augustine. He was.
1:12
He wrote volumes interpreting Agustinian doctrines, and
1:15
Augustine well, he held an uncompromising view of God's
1:19
absolute sovereign. Did a very biblical view of
1:21
human sin, asserting that humans are spiritually dead outside of
1:25
grace. Yes, but as the medieval period
1:28
progressed the Roman Catholic system drifted away from that
1:32
specific starting point. They adopted a semi Pelagian
1:35
stance. Let's breakdown semi pelagianism
1:38
for a second. It basically depreciates the
1:40
fall of man, right? It does.
1:42
Instead of viewing humanity as a spiritual corpse incapable of
1:46
good, which is the biblical reality we hold to in Reformed
1:49
theology, the institution began teaching that humanity was just
1:52
weakened. Like man was sick but still
1:54
breathing. Right.
1:55
And because of that specific theological downgrade, they
1:58
concluded that a person retains the natural ability to cooperate
2:01
with God in securing salvation. And from that one mechanical
2:05
shift, a massive array of new doctrines emerged.
2:08
Oh, absolutely. The historical record lists the
2:10
initiation of Purgatory, prayers to Mary and the Saints, the
2:13
sacrifice of the Mass, and transubstantiation.
2:16
Because when you believe your personal cooperation is required
2:21
to finish the work of salvation, you suddenly require a vast
2:25
collection of tools and mediators to accomplish your
2:28
part of the bargain. You do, and let's look at the
2:31
mechanics of that shift, because it changes the entire functional
2:35
reality of a Christian's life. Right, if you are spiritually
2:38
dead, you require a resurrection, and only God can
2:41
resurrect a corpse. But if you are just weakened by
2:44
sin, well, you need medicine. You need crutches.
2:47
You need a highly organized hospital staff staff to
2:49
administer physical aids to help you limp across the finish line.
2:52
And the church was more than happy to build that hospital and
2:55
charge admission. Which brings us directly to the
2:57
first major controversy of the era, the great visual and
3:01
creedal debates. Yes, the text outlines the
3:04
iconoclastic controversy. So an iconoclast is someone
3:07
advocating for the destruction of religious images.
3:10
Right toward the end of the 3rd century, people began using and
3:14
adoring images. The eastern branch of the church
3:17
was heavily influenced by heathen worship practices in
3:19
this regard. But the Western Church adopted
3:21
it as well, and the initial justification sounded, you know,
3:24
highly practical. They argued that pictures of
3:27
Christ, Mary, the apostles and the Saints were necessary visual
3:31
aids for illiterate people to assist them in their prayers.
3:37
The official institutional line stated these images were to be
3:39
venerated, not outright worshipped.
3:42
But the historical analysis points out a very grim reality.
3:46
The illiterate laypersons almost certainly worship the images
3:49
directly. Because the psychological pull
3:52
of a physical tangible object is staggering, especially for a
3:55
person living in a pre literate society.
3:58
Basil the Great offered a philosophical rationale for this
4:01
practice that actually worsened the situation.
4:04
He argued that the honor paid to an image passes directly onto
4:08
the prototype. You can see the theological trap
4:10
snapping shut right there. Basil blurred the definitive
4:13
line between the creator and the created material.
4:15
He really did. By declaring that honoring
4:18
painted wood somehow transfers that affection up to heaven, he
4:21
provided a highly intellectual cover for rampant idolatry.
4:26
Proponents argued these images beautified the spaces, awakened
4:30
historical memories and functioned as a substitute for
4:33
the Scriptures. But then John and Damascus
4:35
pushed the theology over a dangerous Cliff.
4:38
When Emperor Leo forbade the use of images in 8726, Pope's
4:43
Gregory the Second and Third, along with John of Damascus,
4:46
fought back fiercely. John taught that images
4:49
possessed literal Sacramento value and actually dispensed
4:53
grace. He attempted to maintain a
4:55
philosophical distinction between the absolute worship of
4:57
God and the lesser veneration of images, but he crossed a massive
5:01
theological boundary. Claiming a physical painting can
5:04
actively dispense God's grace changes the definition of how
5:07
God interacts with humanity. I need to push back on John of
5:10
Damascus's logic here. How on earth does a peasant
5:13
differentiate between veneration and worship when they're told
5:15
the object in front of them is actively dispensing divine
5:18
grace? They don't.
5:20
Right. If I am a starving farmer in the
5:22
9th century and I believe the wooden painting of a St. is
5:25
radiating the grace I need to stay out of hell.
5:27
I am not making high level philosophical distinctions.
5:30
I am bowing down to the wood. Yes, and this reached a climax
5:33
in 8787 at the Council of Nicaea.
5:37
They formally approved the use of icons.
5:39
They issued A decree that images of Christ and the Saints should
5:42
receive affection and respectful reverence.
5:44
From that moment forward, image worship became structural to the
5:48
church. It wasn't until 8843 that the
5:51
Eastern Church backed away slightly.
5:53
Right, abandoning sculptured figures and restricting their
5:56
use entirely to flat pictures. But the theological machinery
6:00
was already broken. The mechanism of grace had been
6:02
formally tied to human craftsmanship.
6:05
Think about how a nation's constitution functions.
6:07
If you add one small amendment or change the definition of a
6:11
single noun in a base document, you alter the fate of millions
6:14
of citizens for centuries. You rewrite the rules of the
6:17
entire system. We see this exact dynamic not
6:20
just with visual aids, but with precise vocabulary, specifically
6:24
in the Filio controversy. The text explains that Filioque
6:28
is Latin for and sun. This massive controversy
6:32
centered on a highly specific theological question.
6:35
Who sent the Holy Spirit? Was it the Father alone or the
6:38
Father and the Son? To a modern observer, that might
6:41
sound like a trivial academic debate, but it carried enough
6:44
theological gravity to RIP the Christian world in half.
6:47
The Greek or Eastern Church taught the single procession of
6:50
the Holy Spirit. They maintained that only the
6:52
Father was involved in sending the Spirit.
6:55
The Roman or Western Church looked closely at John 15.26.
7:00
Considering the biblical reality that the Son is of the identical
7:03
essence as the Father. The Western Church taught the
7:06
double procession of the Holy Spirit.
7:07
They argued that both the Father and the Son were responsible for
7:10
sending the Holy Spirit. At the Council of Toledo in
7:13
8589, the Western Church unilaterally added the phrase
7:17
and the sun to the Nicene Creed. And the Eastern Church refused
7:21
point blank to accept this newly inserted doctrine.
7:24
This specific phrasing dispute functioned as the primary
7:27
catalyst that permanently severed the Eastern and Western
7:30
churches in 1054. I want you, the listener, to
7:33
carefully consider the mechanics of this split.
7:36
Yes. Think about the physical objects
7:39
or the precise phrasing utilized in your own church background.
7:43
How might those seemingly minor details subtly alter your
7:47
theological understanding of who God is and how he operates?
7:51
Because the specific words we employ and the tangible objects
7:54
we Revere shape our theology far more aggressively than we
7:58
realize. Moving forward from the creedal
8:00
debates, we see the overarching drift towards semi pelagianism
8:05
hit a massive wall of resistance in the 9th century.
8:08
The institution's trajectory toward a works based cooperative
8:11
view of salvation was challenged by a solitary monk named
8:14
Gottschalk. Gottschalk attempted to single
8:17
handedly, forcefully return the Church to the strict Augustinian
8:20
doctrine of predestination. From our vantage point in the
8:23
Reformed tradition, analyzing this through the lens of the
8:26
Westminster Confession, Gottschalk is a theological
8:29
lightning bolt in a very dark sky.
8:31
He vigorously defended the truth that God had determined all
8:34
things through His eternal decree.
8:36
He entirely rejected the softer notion that election was based
8:39
on God simply having foreknowledge of a person's
8:42
future spiritual choices. Instead, he taught a robust
8:46
double predestination, an active election to salvation for some,
8:51
and a reprobation to eternal punishment for others.
8:54
God shocks Theology presented an uncompromising view of God's
8:58
absolute sovereignty. His contemporaries immediately
9:01
attempted to soften the implications.
9:03
They argued that sin was not a part of God's predestination.
9:07
They claimed God only predestined the punishment for
9:09
sin, meaning an active election to damnation could not be a
9:12
factual reality. But Gottschalk refused to yield,
9:16
maintaining a rigid focus on salvation by grace alone rather
9:19
than human works. When you analyze his stance
9:22
through a Reformed lens, the sheer terror he struck into the
9:25
hearts of the medieval church hierarchy becomes glaringly
9:28
obvious. His teaching left absolutely
9:31
zero room for their expanding system of sacraments and good
9:33
works. If God has determined all things
9:36
by His eternal decree, and if salvation is truly an unmerited
9:39
gift of grace, then the institutional church has nothing
9:42
to sell you. They cannot demand your ongoing
9:45
cooperation through their specific rituals to secure your
9:50
standing with the Almighty. Gottschalk's theology dismantled
9:53
the entire economic and structural leverage the medieval
9:55
church held over the individual soul.
9:58
And the institutional machine responded with terrifying
10:01
brutality. I really want to breakdown what
10:04
it costs to stand against a massive institutional machine
10:07
when defending the doctrine of grace.
10:09
Well, let's look at the human cost of that brutality.
10:12
In AD 848, at the Senate of Maines, Gottschalk was formally
10:17
condemned. He was physically scourged.
10:19
They whipped a man severely for holding to the doctrine of God's
10:22
sovereign grace. Following the Scourging, he was
10:24
imprisoned for life. He sat in a cell for over 2
10:27
decades, finally dying in 869 without ever recanting his
10:32
belief. When we discuss theological
10:34
history, we often sanitize the violence.
10:36
Gottschalk's life demonstrates the staggering cost of standing
10:39
against an entrenched institutional machine.
10:41
Defending the pure doctrine of grace in that era was not an
10:44
academic exercise. It was an act of theological
10:47
treason against the men who control the economy of
10:49
salvation. His resistance exposes a glaring
10:52
truth. The Sacramento system required
10:55
semi pelagianism to survive. If salvation is entirely the
10:59
sovereign work of God from beginning to end, the human
11:02
hierarchy loses its leverage over the peasant class.
11:05
So if Godshock threatened the Sacramento system, we have to
11:09
look at how the sacraments themselves were being redefined
11:12
during this exact time frame to understand why that system was
11:16
so fiercely guarded. Right.
11:18
If the authorities are silencing voices of grace, they must
11:21
actively construct mechanical systems of works to replace
11:24
them. The text brings us to a monk
11:26
named Red Bertis from the monastery of Corby in France.
11:29
In 8831 he wrote a treatise entitled On the Body and Blood
11:34
of the Lord. In this specific document, Red
11:36
Burtis introduced the doctrine of transubstantiation.
11:38
He asserted that when the officiating priest uttered
11:41
Christ's words of consecration, specifically this is my body,
11:44
this is my blood, a literal miracle occurred on the altar.
11:47
According to his teaching, the physical bread and wine mutated
11:50
into the literal physical body and blood of Jesus Christ.
11:54
Hold on, I need to look closely at how Red Burtis justified this
11:57
to the average person sitting in the pews.
11:59
Well, he acknowledged that the outward phenomena, which
12:02
includes the color, the physical form and the taste of the
12:05
elements, remained identical. The bread still tastes like
12:09
bread. The wine still tastes like.
12:10
Wine. But he claimed that inwardly a
12:13
hidden miracle occurred, fundamentally altering the
12:16
actual substance of the items. He built this massive
12:19
theological structure on a rigidly literal interpretation
12:22
of John Chapter 6, where Jesus says I am the bread of life, eat
12:26
the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, combining it
12:30
with Christ's statements in the upper room.
12:32
Red Bertus treated this highly metaphorical spiritual language
12:36
as literal physical fact. He did include a caveat stating
12:40
that the value of this miracle applied exclusively to the
12:43
believer who partook in faith. It remained non effective for
12:46
the unbeliever. While this extreme view faced
12:49
initial opposition, the Roman Catholic Church formally adopted
12:53
transubstantiation as official dog night in the 13th century.
12:56
When a church interprets metaphorical spiritual language
12:59
with absolute literalism, the entire focal point of Christian
13:04
worship shifts aggressively. Under a biblically Reformed
13:07
model, the focal point of the gathering is the proclaimed Word
13:11
of God. The Holy Spirit acts upon the
13:13
minds and hearts of the congregation through the hearing
13:16
of the Gospel. But under the doctrine of
13:17
transubstantiation, the focal point shifts entirely away from
13:21
the pulpit and locks on to the physical altar.
13:24
The priest is elevated to the status of a miracle worker,
13:28
possessing the authority to pull Christ down from heaven and
13:31
confine him to a peace of bread. The worshipper is no longer
13:34
engaging their intellect with the proclaimed truth of
13:37
Scripture. Instead, they're physically
13:39
consuming the grace dispensed by the priest's hands.
13:42
It functions as a highly effective, albeit wildly
13:45
unbiblical, method to ensure the populace remains entirely
13:49
dependent on the church hierarchy for their spiritual
13:51
survival. You must physically present
13:54
yourself to the priest to ingest the physical substance of your
13:57
salvation. That creates a massive logical
13:59
problem. How did the church manage to
14:02
justify and systematize these intricate unbiblical doctrines
14:05
like transubstantiation? If your core theology
14:09
contradicts the plain reading of Scripture, you require an
14:13
entirely new framework to defend it, and that is what they built.
14:17
They developed a new academic system specifically designed to
14:20
defend these ideas using human logic.
14:23
The Moody Handbook defines this as medieval scholasticism.
14:26
Scholasticism is the term applied to the monastic schools
14:30
called Scola, operating heavily during the 11th and 12th
14:32
centuries. The scholars gathered in these
14:34
schools, but their primary goal was a radical departure from
14:38
biblical study. They did not attempt to uncover
14:41
new truth from the Scriptures. Instead, they sought to validate
14:43
and defend the existing established doctrines of the
14:46
Church through rigorous logic. The text states this very
14:50
clearly. Theology was to be treated from
14:52
a philosophical point of view rather than from a strictly
14:55
biblical viewpoint. That statement exposes A
14:58
staggering methodological failure.
15:01
When you deliberately abandoned the biblical viewpoint in favor
15:04
of a philosophical 1, you elevate human reason above
15:09
divine revelation. Scholasticism gained immense
15:11
traction largely because the writings of the Greek
15:14
philosopher Aristotle were translated into Latin in the
15:17
12th century. The Scholastics enthusiastically
15:20
seized upon the deductive logic of Aristotle as their primary
15:24
tool for categorizing biblical truth.
15:26
The handbook outlines 3 distinct forms of scholasticism that
15:30
dominated the era. First we see realism.
15:34
Following the philosophy of Plato, realism taught that
15:36
universal ideas exist apart from individual objects.
15:40
Thinkers like Anne Selman Bonaventura were prominent
15:42
realists. 2nd The moderate realists emerged following the
15:46
framework of Aristotle. They taught the universal ideas.
15:48
Concepts like truth and goodness have an objective existence, but
15:52
they do not exist separately from their manifestation in
15:54
individual things. Peter Abelard and Thomas Aquinas
15:57
represented this view, and history generally considers
16:00
Aquinas the greatest of all the scholastic thinkers.
16:02
The third form was nominalism. This arose as a sharp reaction
16:06
against realism. Nominalism taught that universal
16:09
ideas have absolutely no existence outside the human
16:12
mind. William of Occam was the primary
16:14
representative of this view. The nominalist pushed their
16:17
logic to a highly dangerous extreme, denying the reality of
16:22
anything outside of direct human experience.
16:24
Because they could not empirically touch or experience
16:27
the Trinity, they outright denied the doctrine of the
16:30
Trinity. The text points out that the
16:31
concept of nominalism actively paved the way for later
16:35
centuries of empiricism and pragmatism.
16:38
Let me offer an analogy to picture the disaster of
16:40
scholasticism. Imagine trying to build a new
16:43
house, but you are forced to use blueprints designed for an an
16:46
entirely different type of structure.
16:48
Like using ancient Greek philosophies blueprints to try
16:50
and build a Christian theological house, right?
16:53
Aristotle's blueprint was designed for a Pagan worldview.
16:56
When you force Christian doctrine into the rigid shape of
16:59
Aristotelian logic, you alter the shape of the rooms.
17:03
The doors do not fit the frames, the foundation cracks, and the
17:06
final house looks absolutely nothing like the biblical
17:09
structure it was supposed to be. That analogy perfectly captures
17:12
the structural deformation. Because Scholasticism
17:15
prioritized this intense philosophical categorization and
17:18
deductive logic over exegesis, theologians began to
17:22
microscopically dissect human nature and sin using
17:25
Aristotelian categories. They applied Greek blueprints to
17:29
the human soul. This moves our analysis into
17:32
medieval anthropology, their specific study of humanity and
17:36
sin. The text highlights Anselm
17:38
living from 10:33 to 11:00 O 9. Anselm taught the doctrine of
17:42
original sin, but he introduced a highly specific philosophical
17:45
nuance. He stated that original sin
17:47
could also be called natural sin because it did not refer to the
17:50
origin of the human race itself, but referred exclusively to the
17:53
condition of the individual as a direct result of the fall.
17:56
Anselm argued that because all human nature was represented in
17:59
Adam and Eve, their sin infected all humanity.
18:03
The sin was propagated for with a corrupted nature.
18:05
Children are affected because they partake of this human
18:08
nature. They send an atom, are polluted
18:10
with sin, and stand guilty before God.
18:13
Up to that point, Anselm sounds remarkably close to a solid,
18:17
reformed understanding of federal headship and
18:20
representation in Adam. But Anselm introduces a
18:23
distinction regarding the human will that begins to break the
18:26
biblical model. He taught that true freedom was
18:29
lost as a result of the fall, but the voluntary faculty was
18:32
not destroyed, he claimed Man retains his will.
18:36
Anselm created a hard distinction between freedom,
18:39
which he entirely rejected, and voluntary ability, which he
18:42
acknowledged. He rejected the notion that man
18:45
has freedom with a sense of indifference, meaning the
18:48
ability to choose either right or wrong equally.
18:51
Instead, he taught that man's will is made specifically for
18:54
the purpose of choosing good. Then Thomas Aquinas arrives and
18:57
adds even denser philosophical layers to this anthropological
19:00
model. Quaintness defines sin as
19:01
something negative, specifically the literal loss of original
19:05
righteousness. But he also defined it as
19:07
something positive, the active lust of the flesh.
19:09
He agreed that this sinful nature is propagated by the
19:12
parents directly to their offspring.
19:15
Aquinas taught that Adam's sin transferred to all humanity
19:19
because of the fundamental unity of the human race.
19:21
He declared that all who are born of Adam may be considered
19:24
as one man, and thus men derived from Adam are members of one
19:27
single body. Aquinas identified the specific
19:30
results of original sin as the alienation of the human will
19:32
from God, the disorder of the internal powers of the soul, and
19:36
a legal liability to punishment. The Scholastics possessed an
19:39
obsession with categorizing every aspect of existence, and
19:43
they went to work categorizing sin itself with microscopic
19:47
precision. They recognize what they called
19:48
capital sins. We frequently hear these
19:51
referred to today as the Seven Deadly Sins, Pride,
19:54
Covetousness, Lust, Anger, Gluttony, Envy, and Sloth.
19:58
But then they divided these sins into two severe legal categories
20:02
that change the entire daily life of the believer.
20:05
First, they defined mortal sins. These constituted A willful,
20:08
severe transgression of the law of God and effectively severed a
20:12
person's relationship with God. Second, they defined venial
20:15
sins. These were considered a lesser
20:17
deviation from God, committed without sufficient reflection or
20:21
full consent of the will. The massive theological catch
20:24
with venial sins is that the Scholastics claim they could be
20:28
atoned for by temporal punishments.
20:30
You could literally do physical penance to pay off a venial sin.
20:34
The categorization of mortal versus venial sins represents a
20:38
severe departure from biblical anthropology.
20:40
In Reformed thought, drawing directly from the text of
20:43
Scripture, any sin is a violation of God's infinite holy
20:47
and deserves infinite eternal punishment.
20:49
By claiming humans possessed the capability to atone for certain
20:53
sins through temporal earthly punishments, the Scholastics
20:56
reinforced a merit based works righteousness system.
21:00
They essentially created a legal loophole where human effort
21:03
could satisfy divine justice. Alongside this intense analysis
21:06
of human sin, we also see the rapid development of a doctrine
21:09
regarding the Virgin Mary. Due to her expanding prominence
21:12
in the Church's visual and liturgical life, a fierce debate
21:16
arose regarding her personal sinfulness.
21:18
The Church already taught Mary was currently without sin, but
21:21
the debated question focused on her origin.
21:24
Was she conceived without sin entirely, or was she stained by
21:28
original sin but then made Immaculate in her prenatal
21:30
state? The monk read Bertus, the exact
21:34
same man who pushed transubstantiation, was the
21:36
first to teach that Mary remains sinless in the womb and entered
21:40
the world entirely without the stain of original sin.
21:42
The text notes that when the doctrine of the Immaculate
21:45
Conception was first officially presented in 1140, it faced
21:49
heavy theological opposition. Bernard of Clairvaux opposed it
21:52
vigorously. Remarkably, even Thomas Aquinas
21:55
supposed it, likely because it conflicted with his rigid views
21:59
on the universal transmission of Adam's sin.
22:01
But the belief gradually gained massive popular acceptance among
22:05
the laypeople over the centuries, and it was finally
22:07
declared a faithful, binding dogma of the Roman Catholic
22:10
Church much later, in 1854. Looking at this entire medieval
22:14
view of anthropology, the text provides a stark, defining
22:17
conclusion. The Roman Catholic view emerged
22:20
asserting that man originally possessed A lighteousness that
22:22
was supernaturally endowed. He was not morally neutral at
22:26
creation. As a result of the fall, man
22:28
lost this supernatural righteousness.
22:30
But, and here is the critical semi Pelagian shift we mentioned
22:34
earlier, he did not lose his natural abilities.
22:37
The result, according to medieval theology, was not total
22:40
depravity, but rather moral neutrality.
22:42
They believed man landed in a neutral state out of which he
22:46
retained the ability to actively cooperate with God in securing
22:50
his own salvation. That specific conclusion
22:53
regarding moral neutrality is the theological pivot point of
22:56
the entire medieval era. If humanity lands in a state of
22:59
moral neutrality rather than total spiritual death, the
23:03
entire mechanics of salvation must mutate to accommodate human
23:07
effort. This leads our analysis directly
23:09
into soteriology, the doctrine of salvation.
23:12
Since humans are viewed as capable of cooperating, we see a
23:15
wide chaotic array of theories regarding the atonement during
23:18
this era. Anselm promoted what the
23:20
illusions often call the commercial theory.
23:22
He taught that through sin, man had actively robbed God of the
23:26
honor due to him. God possessed 2 choices.
23:29
He could choose to punish sin directly, or He could provide
23:33
satisfaction to vindicate His honor by giving His Son.
23:36
Anselm argued God chose the latter.
23:39
Christ's death brought honor back to God.
23:41
Christ received a reward for this massive sacrifice, and He
23:44
passes that reward on to sinners in the specific form of
23:47
forgiveness. Then Peter Abelard enters the
23:49
debate and reacts strongly against Anselm's framework.
23:52
Abelard taught that God did not actually require the death of
23:56
Christ to atone for sin at all. Instead, God simply utilized the
24:00
crucifixion to reveal his love. Abelard believed God freely
24:04
pardoned sinners just because of his inherent love, which is
24:07
demonstrated visibly in the suffering of Christ.
24:09
This became known as the moral influence view of the atonement.
24:13
Bernard of Clairvau rejected Abelard's theory completely,
24:16
insisting that it was indeed the literal blood of Christ, not
24:19
simply his moral example, that procured A believer's
24:22
redemption. Peter Lombard attempted to split
24:24
the difference, aggressively combining the concepts of Anselm
24:27
and Abelard. Lombard stated that Christ died
24:30
for sinners and that witnessing this death moves sinners to love
24:34
God, which then results in their release from the bonds of sin.
24:38
Thomas Aquinas also reflected a complex blending of both Anselm
24:42
and Abelard. Aquinas viewed Christ as the
24:45
head of the human race who dispensed his own perfection
24:48
downward to. He saw Christ functioning as the
24:51
teacher and pattern of the human race through His teachings,
24:54
acts, and physical sufferings. These sufferings reveal God's
24:57
love and awaken A responsive, cooperative love in the hearts
25:01
of men. However, the text makes a very
25:03
blunt, highly critical assessment of this era's work on
25:06
soteriology. It states that the medieval age
25:09
contributed little to a further awareness of the doctrine of the
25:12
atonement. The theories generated were
25:14
largely philosophical speculations rather than
25:17
concepts rooted in a rigorous biblical exegesis of penal
25:21
substitution. And because they lacked a clear
25:23
biblical view of the atonement, their definition of God's grace
25:26
became incredibly convoluted. The text says that although the
25:29
medieval church gave verbal assent to Augustine, their
25:33
actual doctrinal teachings were moving rapidly towards semi
25:36
Pelagianism. The general view held that man's
25:39
will was not destroyed through the fall, allowing him full
25:42
capacity to cooperate with God. The Scholastics acknowledged a
25:45
requirement for grace, but they divided it up into highly
25:48
technical, microscopic categories.
25:50
Thomas Aquinas taught that grace is essential, stating it is
25:54
impossible for man to turn from guilt to righteousness apart
25:57
from God's grace. But then he created severe
26:00
distinctions. He separated free grace from
26:03
sanctifying grace. He defined free grace as
26:06
including knowledge like faith and understanding, demonstration
26:10
like healing, miracles and predictive prophecy and
26:13
communication like tongues and interpretation.
26:16
Aquinas then took sanctifying grace and divided it even
26:19
further into operative grace, which he called prevenient, and
26:22
cooperative grace, which he called subsequent.
26:25
I want to clarify the mechanism of cooperative grace here.
26:28
Aquinas implicitly understood man to be actively cooperating
26:32
with God and receiving God's grace.
26:33
It is a joint effort. Peter Lombard made a similar
26:36
highly technical distinction. He spoke of Operating Grace,
26:41
which is wholly a work of God, enabling man to turn to God in
26:45
faith, and cooperating grace involving all subsequent grace.
26:50
This cooperating grace explicitly requires man's
26:53
ongoing active cooperation with God for its reception.
26:57
The text confirms that the inclination, even among the
27:00
absolute brightest scholastic minds of the era, leaned heavily
27:03
towards semi Pelagianism. This cooperative view completely
27:07
fractured their understanding of the relationship between faith
27:10
and works. The Scholastics categorized
27:12
faith into two highly distinct dimensions.
27:15
The first is feeds Informus, which is simply a mental
27:17
knowledge of church doctrine. It is intellectual ascent.
27:20
The second is feeds Informada, which they defined as the faith
27:23
that actually produces concrete works of love.
27:26
They argued that only feeds Informada results in salvation
27:29
and justification. Therefore, the religious life of
27:32
a person in the medieval period was centered not on faith alone,
27:35
but heavily on love and physical good works.
27:38
The text states clearly that the Scholastic's view of
27:40
justification did not produce a new secure relationship with God
27:45
God, but provided the capability for the individual to perform
27:48
the good works necessary to maintain their standing.
27:51
That is the critical, devastating shift in the
27:54
doctrine of justification. The scholastics taught that
27:56
justification is not a judicial declarative act of God, where
28:00
God declares A Sinner perfectly righteous based solely on the
28:04
imputed righteousness of Christ. Instead, they taught
28:07
justification as a cooperative venture in which God dispenses
28:11
sanctifying grace to the individual, and simultaneously
28:14
the individual visual turns to God in contrition and faith in
28:17
an act of their own free will. The theological consequence of
28:21
this cooperative venture is catastrophic for the human
28:23
conscience. The security of salvation
28:26
becomes completely unattainable. If your justification relies
28:29
heavily on your ongoing daily cooperation and your physical
28:32
ability to maintain fights in fermata, you can never truly
28:35
know if you've accomplished enough to satisfy God's
28:38
standard. I want to focus intensely on
28:40
that lack of assurance because it defines the daily reality of
28:43
the medieval believer. Think about the daily
28:45
psychological and spiritual terror of living without any
28:49
security of salvation. If justification is a
28:52
cooperative venture, you're standing before the creator of
28:55
the universe fluctuates with your daily performance.
28:58
You wake up every single morning wondering if you were in a state
29:01
of grace or a state of eternal condemnation.
29:04
You are constantly calculating your venial sins, wondering if
29:08
you have accidentally committed a mortal sin that severed you
29:11
from God. It creates a religious life
29:13
driven entirely by raw fear and intense anxiety.
29:17
Contrast that terror with the peace found in the biblical,
29:20
strictly judicial view of justification.
29:23
When justification is understood as a once for all judicial act
29:26
of God, based entirely on Christ's perfect merit and not
29:30
your own, you possess a solid anchor.
29:33
You have permanent peace with God.
29:35
The medieval individual was robbed of that peace and handed
29:37
a terrifying, endless treadmill of works instead.
29:41
How did that lack of assurance practically impact the
29:43
structural authority of the Church?
29:45
If millions of people are constantly anxious about their
29:47
salvation, where do they turn for relief?
29:50
They turn desperately to the institution that claims to
29:52
control the flow of grace. Since justification was viewed
29:56
as a cooperative venture relying on grace that is dispensed
30:00
progressively over time, the Church needed a physical
30:03
mechanism to dispense that specific grace.
30:06
People required tangible physical methods to receive
30:09
sanctifying grace to keep their fragile salvation afloat.
30:13
This leads directly into medieval ecclesiology, the
30:15
machinery of the medieval church.
30:17
The Church met the intense anxiety of the people by
30:20
providing a highly complex system of sacraments.
30:23
The text notes A2 fold interest in the sacraments first to
30:26
present salvation to the individual in a tangible,
30:29
physical form. And 2nd, to tie the salvation of
30:32
the individual directly to the authority of the Church
30:35
institution. The sacraments literally became
30:37
visible signs of the act of communication, of grace.
30:40
For a long time, the exact number of sacraments was heavily
30:43
debated. Some leaders advocated for six,
30:45
others for seven, and some even pushed for 12 distinct
30:48
sacraments. Peter Lombard was the first to
30:50
formally delineate 7 specific sacraments.
30:53
These were officially acknowledged and locked into
30:56
dogma later at the Council of Florence in 1439.
30:59
The seven are baptism, the Lord's Supper, confirmation,
31:02
extreme unction, penance, ordination, and marriage.
31:06
The text provides a specific breakdown of the supposed
31:09
spiritual effects of each individual action.
31:11
According to medieval theology, baptism provides initial
31:14
regeneration and actively confers spiritual life.
31:18
Confirmation strengthens that new spiritual life.
31:21
The Eucharist, or Lord's Supper, nourishes the spiritual life
31:25
through the physical consumption of Christ.
31:27
Penance is particularly critical in this mechanical system.
31:30
It restores spiritual life if it has been lost through the
31:33
Commission of sin. Extreme unction heals the soul
31:36
and sometimes the physical body near the point of death.
31:39
Holy Orders creates the rulers of the Church, giving them the
31:42
unique authority to administer these rights.
31:44
And matrimony provides God's blessing on the family to
31:47
produce children and fill heaven with the elect.
31:50
Looking at this highly structured list, the text
31:52
concludes that according to medieval theology, salvation and
31:56
sanctification are achieved through works rather than
31:59
through the grace of God. You have to participate in these
32:02
physical acts, administered exclusively by the Church's
32:05
ordained priests, to receive the grace necessary to maintain your
32:10
cooperative justification. And because the Church held an
32:12
absolute monopoly on these life saving sacraments, the leaders
32:16
of the Church amassed an incomprehensible level of
32:19
authority. This brings our analysis to the
32:22
papacy. During the Scholastic period,
32:24
supported by heavyweights like Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of
32:27
Clervau, the papacy claimed both spiritual and temporal supremacy
32:31
over the entire world. They based this astonishing
32:33
claim on the notion that Christ had given Peter unique, sweeping
32:37
authority over the other apostles.
32:39
And that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, passing that
32:42
absolute authority to all future Popes.
32:44
Gration taught that to disobey the Pope is to literally disobey
32:48
God himself. Aquinas taught that the Pope
32:50
alone guarantees the purity of morals and teaching, and that
32:54
the Pope alone possesses the authority to dictate what is to
32:58
be believed by the masses. Pope Innocent the Third took the
33:01
titles and the arrogance even further.
33:04
He declared himself the literal Vicar of Christ on Earth and
33:08
demanded to be addressed as holiness or most Holy.
33:11
Innocent even taught that Melchizedek, the Old Testament
33:14
priest king, was a historical type of the Pope.
33:17
Because the Pope supposedly holds the literal keys to the
33:20
Kingdom and possesses the absolute power to bind and
33:23
loose, anyone who does not submit to his authority is
33:26
declared an active heretic. Therefore, the decree was made
33:29
that there is absolutely no salvation outside the Roman
33:32
Catholic. Church.
33:33
If you are outside the structural bounds of the church,
33:35
you are outside the arc of grace.
33:37
But the papacy did not restrict their control to the spiritual
33:40
realm. That supremacy passed directly
33:42
into the physical realm of the state.
33:44
Innocent the Third declared the Lord gave Peter the entire earth
33:47
to rule over. Therefore, he argued, all civil
33:50
authority, every single king and magistrate, should be subject to
33:53
the book. The Pope claimed the legal
33:54
authority to depose national rulers, receive financial
33:58
tribute from kings, give away earthly territories to his
34:01
allies, punish objectors and completely annul A sovereign
34:05
country's legislation. Pope Gregory the 7th declared
34:08
that he was personally accountable to God for the
34:10
political kingdoms of the world. In 13 O2, Pope Boniface the 8th
34:15
issued a famous papal bull stating that the Pope has
34:18
authority over 2 realms. He controls the spiritual sword,
34:22
meaning the Church, as well as the temporal sword, meaning the
34:25
physical governments of the earth.
34:27
Imagine living as a listener in that specific era.
34:30
Visualize a world where a single religious institution controls
34:33
not just your eternal destiny through the withholding of
34:36
sacraments, but controls your actual national borders, your
34:39
king, and your local laws through papal decrees.
34:42
To bolster these staggering claims regarding the nature of
34:45
the church, the papacy relied heavily on a concept that
34:48
identified the visible church directly with the Kingdom of
34:51
God. The text reveals that this
34:53
concept derived its legal support from 2 forged documents.
34:56
The first was The Donation of Constantine, written around the
34:59
middle of the 8th century. This fraudulent document was
35:02
allegedly written by the Roman Emperor Constantine himself,
35:05
supposedly willing his palace, the city of Rome, its
35:09
surrounding districts and all the cities of Italy directly to
35:12
the Pope and his successors. The second forged document was
35:15
the Decreedals of Isadore, written around the middle of the
35:17
9th century. Based entirely on these
35:20
historical lies, all of life began to revolve around the
35:23
Church. Anything that did not relate
35:26
directly to the Church was renounced and considered
35:29
entirely secular. Yet in a massive twist of
35:32
historical irony, the church itself became entirely
35:34
secularized. Because it considered itself the
35:37
literal, physical Kingdom of God on earth, the institution became
35:41
intensely preoccupied with secular politics, land
35:44
accumulation, wealth hoarding, and temporal warfare rather than
35:48
the spiritual salvation of the people it claimed to shepherd.
35:50
The handbook lists the elements that define the Church in the
35:53
Middle Ages. First, the visible nature of the
35:56
church was highly prioritized. They argued that since Christ
36:00
was visible in the incarnation, the visible Church now continues
36:03
Christ's incarnation on earth, with the Pope's acting as
36:07
visible successors possessing absolute authority.
36:10
Second, they created a severe, rigid distinction between the
36:14
teaching church, meaning all the ordained clergy with the Pope at
36:17
the head, and the hearing church, meaning the faithful
36:20
laypeople whose only job was to honor and fund the clergy. 3rd
36:25
they define the church as being made-up of a body, those simply
36:28
professing the true faith, and a soul those actually united to
36:32
Christ by supernatural gifts. 4th They maintained that the
36:35
Church distributes the graces of Christ exclusively through the
36:38
specific agency of the clergy. Finally, the Church was defined
36:42
as an institution of salvation, a literal saving ark.
36:45
It claimed to teach the true faith, affect sanctification
36:48
mechanically through the sacraments, and govern all
36:51
believers in strict accordance with harsh ecclesiastical law.
36:54
The institution became the sole mediator between God and man,
36:57
entirely replacing Christ's singularly biblical role as
37:01
mediator. We have covered a massive amount
37:04
of historical and theological ground today.
37:06
To summarize, we have traced the structural and theological drift
37:09
of the medieval period, starting from the subtle creedle shifts
37:13
like the addition of a single word in the Filio controversy
37:16
and the justification of visual images.
37:18
We saw the intense philosophical experiments of Scholasticism,
37:22
where Aristotelian logic deformed biblical truth.
37:26
We analyzed the shift from human total depravity to moral
37:30
neutrality, which birthed A cooperative works based view of
37:34
justification. We watched that bad theology
37:36
build a towering, terrifyingly absolute authority in the papacy
37:41
and a mechanical Sacramento system that held human souls
37:45
hostage. The historical reality of the
37:47
medieval church offers a sobering warning.
37:49
Their theology was heavily shaped by external forces,
37:52
forged documents like the Donation of Constantine, and
37:56
secular frameworks like Aristotelian logic.
37:58
They allowed the culture and the philosophy of their day to
38:00
dictate their reading of scripture.
38:02
I want to leave you, the listener, with a final thought
38:04
to ponder as we conclude what hidden cultural assumptions,
38:08
philosophical trends, or accepted traditions might be
38:11
silently shaping the way you understand theology today
38:14
without you even realizing it. That is the question we all need
38:17
to ask. A ship drifting a fraction of a
38:20
degree seems fine on day one, but it changes your destination
38:23
completely. Thank you for joining us as we
38:26
investigated these sources today on reformed thinking.