Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Justification
View through CrossRef
Newman’s Lectures on the Doctrine of Justification are seldom read, but there is perhaps no better place to see his theological reasoning at work. The goals and method of the argument parallel those of Tract 90, which explicitly incorporates the conclusions arrived at in the Lectures. Newman wrote them, initially, to rebut charges of unorthodoxy, as defined by Anglican doctrinal formularies. At issue was whether justification by faith can be reconciled with Tractarian teaching on baptism and obedience as intrinsic to justification. Newman’s endeavour to expound his Church’s official doctrine in a way that minimizes its Reformation origins involves remarkable logical and rhetorical manoeuvres; by the end he appears to have abandoned most of what justification has meant, in favour of a neo-patristic understanding of divine presence, conceived as something like deification.
Title: Justification
Description:
Newman’s Lectures on the Doctrine of Justification are seldom read, but there is perhaps no better place to see his theological reasoning at work.
The goals and method of the argument parallel those of Tract 90, which explicitly incorporates the conclusions arrived at in the Lectures.
Newman wrote them, initially, to rebut charges of unorthodoxy, as defined by Anglican doctrinal formularies.
At issue was whether justification by faith can be reconciled with Tractarian teaching on baptism and obedience as intrinsic to justification.
Newman’s endeavour to expound his Church’s official doctrine in a way that minimizes its Reformation origins involves remarkable logical and rhetorical manoeuvres; by the end he appears to have abandoned most of what justification has meant, in favour of a neo-patristic understanding of divine presence, conceived as something like deification.
Related Results
Golden Gettier
Golden Gettier
Gettier constructed his well-known examples by assuming two things: (1) that the justification needed to know is the kind one can have for a false proposition; and (2) justificatio...
Resurrection, Time, and Justification
Resurrection, Time, and Justification
Resurrection, Time, and Justification: Referencing Karl Barth, Wolfhart Pannenberg, and Robert Jenson delves into the enigmatic concept of time and its relation to Christian theolo...
Attention and Knowledge
Attention and Knowledge
The recognition that attention performs two roles enables one to argue that the epistemology of attention is such that attention provides an immediate improvement to justification,...
Epistemically Proper Belief
Epistemically Proper Belief
This chapter argues that the sort of normativity that is at the heart of epistemology is the sort of normativity involved in assessments of whether a subject’s belief satisfies the...
Opportunity
Opportunity
Chapter 5 proposes using opportunity rather than preference-satisfaction as a normative criterion. I present an ‘Individual Opportunity Criterion’, which essentially states that ex...
How Do We Know that We’re Not Brains in Vats?
How Do We Know that We’re Not Brains in Vats?
In this chapter the contextualist Moorean account of how we know by ordinary standards that we are not brains in vats (BIVs) utilized in Chapter 1 is developed and defended, and th...
Constructivism, Intuitionism, and Ecumenism
Constructivism, Intuitionism, and Ecumenism
Constructivism and intuitionism are often seen as opposed methods of justification in political philosophy. An “ecumenical” view sees them as different but unopposed: each style of...
Nelson Goodman
Nelson Goodman
Goodman addressed the problem of induction twice. His first approach is famous, centers on his “new riddle of induction,” and is the locus classicus of modern reflective equilibriu...

