Iustitia Dei (Part IV)

Introduction:

The medieval doctrine of justification is greatly influenced by Augustine, terefore, it is important to know Augustine's doctrine of justification. During this time there's also a shift in the theological focus from who is Christ to what he did- person to work.

The pre-Augustinain tradition:

The patristic era is characterised by the effort to reduce the tension between the need for a corpus as regula fidei and the need to expand the corpus in the face of opposition, and the borrowing of hellenistic culture and pagan philosophy for the proclamationof the gospel in a pagan culture. Witht the utilization of hellenistic culture and pagan philosophy, we discover that sometimes there's a subordination of the biblcal to a philosophical view of God. The zeal to preach a Hebraic gospel in a hellenistic milieu has the possibility of compromising the teachings of Christ by the Hellenism of its early followers. This is evidently so in the two major distortions which begin in the east and was transferred to the ermeging wast. These are:1. the introduction of Stoic concept of libeum arbitrium in the articulation of human response to the divine intiative in justification;2. the implicit link between sedaqa, dikaiosune and iustitia and the concept of merit inevitably correlates human effort and justification within the western church.We see a reaction against the above two since the time of Augsutine and the Palagian controversy many be seen as having highlighted teh above two points, although not exactly as it is worded above. Therefore, we have to follow late medieval theological scholarship with the differnetiation before and afte the Pelagain controversy.The early Christian were interested in chirstiology and trinitarian theology and little interest in the idea of justification. It is also evidently that teh ealy christians do not see soteriology in terms of justification. Justification was simply not a theological issue in pre-Augustinian tradition. There is no clear argument on the concept of predestination, fee will and grace as well during this period of time. It was so until controversy forced a full discussion in the church. By end of 4th century the Greek Fatehrs had formulated on the teaching of free will based upon philosophical rather than biblcal foudnations. Reacting against fatalism they avocated the total freedom of man to make his choice of good and evil. It is also with the Latin Fathers that teh idea of original sin first begin to be specualted and its implicit consequences for man's moral faculties.Pauline writing has minimal influence during thsi period can be accreditted to two factgors:

1. uncertainity to the extent of the NT canon; and

2.mainly the church faced external opposition from pagan and semi-pagan fatalism and not from Jewish Christian activist teaching works of the law which is prominent in Paul's writings.

The emphasis in the early fathers on freedom of fallen man and minimizing the concept of original sin is because Gnosticisma nd their anti-Gnostic polemic. This optimism of the capacities of fallen man fall into much suspicion as whether it is truly Christian.The pre-Augustinian period can be cahracterized by the upholding of freedom of fallen man in the face of fatalism. There were many discussions among the early fatehrs regarding the freedom of fallen man to choose good and evil, and God can't force the free will but merely influence it.The western church is slower in their thological development compared to the east, and as such the theological vocab of teh east becomes current in the west. This necessitated the translation of Greek into Latin and teh inevitable shift in sematic field. Tertullian was considered the most influential figure in the western theological traditions and it was him who introduced the term liberum arbitrium to th west. This is evidence of the weak influence of Pauline writings in the early church with the unobstructed introduction of non-biblical, non-Pauline term into the discussion of justification in the early chruch.The earliest commentry of Pauline epsitles is that of Ambrosiaster and his exposition of justification by faith is grounded in the contrast between chistianity and Judaism. It has not yet had the universal notion of justification by faith as a freedom from the works of teh law. It is discussed within the Jewish background of chistianity. Like Tertullian, he is also engrossed with the possibility of man's ability to acquire merit befroe God. For Tertullian, the man who performs good make God his debtor. The Ciceroina concept of justification (giving each man his due) underlines this teaching. This concept of divine obligation is introduced to the west rather naviely and was due to Augustine's theological genius.For teh first three hundred an dfifty years of church history, her teachings regarding justification was inchoate and ill-defined. The navivete and inexactitude reflects a lack of controversy which would force more precise definition of teh terms used. The 'works-righteousness' appraoch of justification is free from latter association during the first centuries and cesed to be innocent during the Pelagian controversy and threatened the gospel as the mesage of God's free grace.(McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 17-23 )