(urth) Atonement Theology and the Conciliator

[Matthew Weber]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:59 PM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>wrote:

> On 1/13/2011 5:45 PM, Matthew Weber wrote:
>
>  On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:33 PM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net<mailto:
>> dstockhoff at verizon.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Anselm and Urban reputely pulled out their lawn chairs to watch the
>> Cathars---fellow Christians who followed more conservative teachings---get
>> massacred.
>>
>> *********************
>>
>> Anselm?  No mean feat for a man who'd been dead 100 years before the
>> Albigensian Crusade began.
>>
> Must have been a different Anselm. I'll check that.


I'm sure there were plenty of Anselms around--but not St Anselm.


>
>
>> If your reference point is Gnosticism, then the teachings of the Cathars
>> were indeed more conservative.  And the Carolingian emperors did not create
>> a new rite, much less a new theology--they suppressed local rites in favor
>> of the Roman Rite, and their theology is consistent with the development of
>> Western Catholicism to that point.
>>
> Well, it's your source against mine. ;) However, since my source is recent,
> its relative correctness is irrelevant. Wolfe would know your source, not
> mine.
>
> OTOH, what you are saying is exactly what I said: the Carols suppressed
> local (Saxon) rites and their Christianity WAS Western Catholicism.


I don't think there were any Saxon rites to speak of.  It wasn't long before
Charlemagne that the Franks were converted; hence, the rites in use were
those of whichever missionaries brought the faith to the area.  My
impression is that the Gallican rite was most prominent there.


>  Unquestionably churchmen of the time countenanced things that repulse us.
>>  But I'm very wary of truth-testing religious propositions by measuring them
>> against the political positions currently in fashion; if anything, it seems
>> to me that it ought to go the other way around.  If there are timeless
>> religious truths, then they should inform our political decisions.
>>
> As I stated, and as you know more than I do, Anselm's theology didn't last,
> at least officially. So it was truth-tested pretty quickly and found
> wanting. Our current "fashionable" positions don't really enter into it
> except as Wolfe might agree with them.
>
>
On the contrary--Anselm's *Cur Deus Homo *is still a key work in the
development of Western soteriology, and it has never fallen out of favor.
The Christus Victor theory has come back into style recently, but I wonder
how much of that is due to modern squeamishness about sacrifice.


> And I am sure he would not approve of slaughtering Muslims for salvation,
> so....
>

No, most likely not, and neither do I.  On the other hand, remind me how the
Seljuk Turks came by their possession of the Holy Land...?

-- 
Matt +

The gods have their own rules.
    Ovid [Publius Ovidius Naso], (43 B.C. - A.D. c.18), Metamorphoses, IX,
500
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20110113/1a3e8a55/attachment-0004.htm>