This short methodological rebuttal points out that church history is not an attempt to prove Arminius or any other historical person to be right or wrong, but a scientific effort to represent them without negative bias or prejudice.
W. Stephen Gunter
Willem J. VAN ASSELT
PROTESTANT SCHOLASTICISM: SOME METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE STUDY OF ITS DEVELOPMENT WILLEM J. VAN ASSELT Utrecht This present issue of the Dutch Review of Church History brings together papers by European and American church historians presented during a colloquium at Utrecht
the mainstream Enlightenment and only as an attempt at European self-reflection effectively excludes the theoretical and methodological contributions made to the field by the cultures described (a fact that remains to this day astoundingly unstudied), and by the not necessarily enlightened worldviews
The purpose of this contribution is to show how in the ARCIC dialogue the reality of ‘ecclesial conversion’ has become an important aspect of the methodology of ARCIC to overcome the divisions between both traditions. We first describe the evolving methodology of ARCIC. Four stages will be distinguished and discussed in detail, including (1) an hermeneutics of overcoming doctrinal division by going to the origins (ARCIC I), (2) an eschatological hermeneutics, (3) an hermeneutics of practice, and finally (4) an hermeneutics of receptive learning.
After this discussion we give a survey of recent expressions of ecclesial repentance – understood as the act in which churches/denominational bodies make official statements of repentance, apology, confession or requests for forgiveness for those things which where once official church policy or practice. We will study some examples of ecclesial repentance in the field of disunity of churches: the Lambeth Conference 1920, Resolution 9 on the reunion of Christendom; Pope Paul VI’s address at the opening of the second session of the Second Vatican Council in 1963, in which he expressed a request for pardon, addressed as much to God as to a group of contemporaries; in its decree on ecumenism, the Second Vatican Council was aware of the ecumenical potential of a mea culpa; in his Apostolic Letter Tertio millennio adveniente (arts. 33-36) the Pope expresses the hope that the Jubilee of 2000 might be the occasion for a purification of the memory of the Church from all forms of ‘counter-witness and scandal’ which have occurred in the course of the past millennium.
In the end, we describe how ARCIC III is intending to make use of the method of ‘receptive ecumenism’ in its work, without negating its previous methodology, but instead integrating it. Finally, we discuss the chances and the limits of integrating the recent practices of ecclesial repentance and receptive ecumenism into ARCIC’s methodology.
Keith D. Stanglin
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, DOI: 10.1163/187124112X621149 CHRC () – Church History and Religious Culture www.brill.nl/chrc Methodological Musings on Historiography (A Rejoinder) Keith D. Stanglin Keywords Arminius; historical theology; methodology I am grateful for the
methodological approaches in their introduction, arguing that their essays on corporations are not simply comparative or connective global history, but instead an integrative history. To do this they combine comparative and connective approaches with a study of globalization (10), in order to demonstrate that
The Formation of an Elite Clerical Identity
The Church in Fourteenth-Century Iceland examines the development of this social group through an analysis of bishops’ sagas, annals, and documents. In the process, it chronicles major developments in the Icelandic Church after the reforms of the late thirteenth century, including its emphasis on property and land ownership, and the growth of ecclesiastical bureaucracy.