Philosophy and Theology

By the time of William of Ockham, the university view of the nature of theology had long been debated. Key figures, such as Thomas Aquinas, Henry of Ghent, Godfrey of Fontaines, John Duns Scotus, and Peter Auriol, had pushed the discussion concerning the nature of theology to the point that the term ‘‘theology’’ came to mean either the study of the Scriptures, or deductive theology or

Declarative theology. The last two technical expressions pointed to different ways of studying the contents of the Christian scriptures. Each approach used philosophy in different ways. Deductive theology received its name from its primary role: a deductive theologian assumed as true certain basic teachings of the Scriptures, such as the truths summarized in the creed of the church. Reason or philosophy could not prove such truths; they were accepted by faith. However, once the theologians accepted them as true, they could assume them as premises and search to see if they could find other premises that might allow them to draw further conclusions. When they found a suitable necessary premise, then they could draw a conclusion that would also be necessary. When they found a strong contingent premise, their drawn conclusion would be contingent, but a strong theological conclusion. In short, the first option would produce theological certainty; the second option would develop theological opinions. Deductive theologians aimed to have their theological opinions to be as strong as possible, so they tended in lieu of certainty to pursue premises that were most probable. The deductive approach thus demanded the strongest arguments and modeled its procedures on the Posterior Analytics, Aristotle’s book on demonstration. Pursuing this method, theologians realized that if they started with premises that were accepted on faith, they differed from Aristotle who started with self-evident or evident premises. Still, their method itself was similar and they could claim that they were at least doing ‘‘a science of the faith.’’ They could go further and see what kind of arguments would bring them even closer to science as Aristotle saw it. They could try to find arguments that would demonstrate things about God and his attributes, so that even in an Aristotelian sense they would have demonstrated or necessary naturally known conclusions about God or the works of God. This made the logic of demonstration and the study of metaphysics and physics very important to the deductive theologian.

The declarative theologian approached things differently. He too started with the main truths of Christian faith. However, he did not deduce further conclusions. He tried to bring understanding to the articles of the Creed. Following St. Augustine and St. Anselm, the declarative theologian concentrated mostly on truths the church accepted on faith and then asked if he could find supporting or confirming arguments for the believed truths. He knew that many of the things Christians believed could not be demonstrated; still he knew that if God were not contradictory, then what he revealed in the Scriptures could not contradict his gift of reason when it was used properly. The declarative theologian still proceeded according to logic, but he did not take the model of demonstration in the Posterior Analytics as his primary guide. Like Augustine and Anselm, he aimed at bringing understanding to the truths accepted on faith. He asked: what causes misunderstanding? He realized that there were many things that could confuse believers. Sloppy definitions cause misunderstanding. Weak analogies cause misunderstanding. Lack of supporting reasons leads to hesitation regarding things that are believed. Opponents, attackers, and heretics also cause confusion. The declarative theologian knew then that his task was to find clearer definitions that help understanding. He needed to discover better analogies and supporting arguments gained mainly from a knowledge of the natural world that might bring some recovery from doubt and confusion. Finally, he needed to show the weaknesses in positions that opposed or distorted what he knows by faith must be true. These are the main tasks of the declarative theologian as a theologian. Like the deductive theologian, he might also examine what about God and creation might be demonstrated, but he would call it metaphysics rather than theology. He might want to discover what new necessary truths of faith he might deduce; but realizing how limited is the knowledge of necessary evident truth that might help in this endeavor, he tended to concentrate on whatever probable or confirming arguments would help him best to refute heretics and critics. William of Ockham, like many of his predecessors mentioned above, was both a deductive and a declarative theologian. To achieve the goals of both approaches to theology, he had to pursue logic in all its areas and dimensions, metaphysics as a science that searches for what is necessary and certain, and physics as a scientific portrait of creation.